Jat stir: Organisation opposed to quota files caveat in Supreme Court
The new act passed by the Haryana assembly provides reservation for the Jat and five other communities under the backward class (C) category.
New Delhi: A Delhi-based body, opposed to the recent law granting quota to Jats and five other castes under the newly-carved Backward Classes (C) category, filed a caveat in the Supreme Court on Thursday saying that it be heard before any order is passed on a plea of a Jat organisation in support of the reservation.
Hawa Singh Sangwan, a former commandant of CRPF and President of Akhil Bhartiya Jat Aarakshan Sangharsh Samiti (ABJASS), had on Wednesday moved the apex court challenging an interim order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court staying the the Haryana law granting quota to Jats and five other castes.
OBC Reservation Raksha Samiti, a body registered in Delhi, has filed the caveat through its President and advocate Ombir Singh in the apex court saying that it be heard if the plea of ABJASS is heard and some interim orders are passed.
The Samiti was one of the petitioners in 2014 before the apex court which had quashed the decision of then UPA-II government to grant quota benefits to Jats.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, on 26 May, had stayed the reservation for Jats and five other communities while hearing a plea challenging the constitutional validity of the Haryana Backward Classes (reservation in services and admission in educational institutions) Act 2016 that was passed unanimously by the state Assembly on 29 March.
The plea against the interim order of the High Court has been filed by the ABJASS on Wednesday.
The new act passed by the Haryana assembly provides reservation for Jats and five other communities under the backward class (C) category.
The five other communities — including Jat Sikhs, Muslim Jats, Bishnois, Rors and Tyagis — would be entitled to 10 percent reservation in government services and admission in educational institutions.
Subscribe to Moneycontrol Pro at ₹499 for the first year. Use code PRO499. Limited period offer. *T&C apply
Disagreeing with govt can't be seditious, says SC; dismisses PIL demanding action against Farooq Abdullah
The top court was hearing a plea which referred to Abdullah's statement on restoring Article 370, which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, and contended it clearly amounts to a seditious act and therefore he is liable to be punished under Section 124-A of the IPC
The nation's highest court delivered a blow to the ex-president, who has been waging a protracted legal battle to prevent his tax records from being handed over to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance
The apex court said the proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) will go on and but will not culminate into any final order on an amalgamation of FRL with Reliance