https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195010 The Court upheld the constitutional validity of Articles 243-D(6) and 243-T(6), enabling reservations for backward classes in local self-government. It emphasized that concerns about disproportionate reservations should be addressed through challenges against State Legislations. Additionally, the Court affirmed the validity of Articles 243-D(4) and 243-T(4), stating that chairperson positions in local self-government are distinct from public employment posts and are essential for empowering marginalized groups. The Court concluded that reservations in local self-government serve a unique affirmative action purpose and should not breach the 50% vertical reservation limit, except in Scheduled Areas to protect Scheduled Tribes' interests. en-us Tue, 11 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Oct 2017 11:53:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195010 The Court upheld the constitutional validity of Articles 243-D(6) and 243-T(6), enabling reservations for backward classes in local self-government. It emphasized that concerns about disproportionate reservations should be addressed through challenges against State Legislations. Additionally, the Court affirmed the validity of Articles 243-D(4) and 243-T(4), stating that chairperson positions in local self-government are distinct from public employment posts and are essential for empowering marginalized groups. The Court concluded that reservations in local self-government serve a unique affirmative action purpose and should not breach the 50% vertical reservation limit, except in Scheduled Areas to protect Scheduled Tribes' interests. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195010