https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303691 The Court upheld the validity of the 50% reservation limit set in the previous judgment and ruled that there was no need to reconsider it. The Court found that the Maharashtra SEBC Act, 2018, granting reservations to the Maratha community, did not meet exceptional circumstances to exceed the reservation limit. Additionally, the Gaikwad Commission's report was deemed insufficient to justify surpassing the 50% reservation limit. The Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act, 2018, was clarified not to strip State Legislatures of their authority to identify socially and educationally backward classes, although the identification process was centralized. The Court affirmed that States still possess the power to legislate on backward classes without violating the federal structure of the Constitution. en-us Wed, 05 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Sep 2022 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303691 The Court upheld the validity of the 50% reservation limit set in the previous judgment and ruled that there was no need to reconsider it. The Court found that the Maharashtra SEBC Act, 2018, granting reservations to the Maratha community, did not meet exceptional circumstances to exceed the reservation limit. Additionally, the Gaikwad Commission's report was deemed insufficient to justify surpassing the 50% reservation limit. The Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act, 2018, was clarified not to strip State Legislatures of their authority to identify socially and educationally backward classes, although the identification process was centralized. The Court affirmed that States still possess the power to legislate on backward classes without violating the federal structure of the Constitution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303691