State revives 90:10 quota plan

The High Court had observed that the proposal had been decided on without any supporting study having been conducted or expert opinion sought,and that it had been prompted by a political agenda to favour students from the state board.

Now,the government has filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court contending that students of other boards enjoyed better facilities than those provided to the students of state’s SSC (Secondary School Certificate).

The government’s Supreme Court counsel,Sanjay Kharde,said the SLP is likely to come up for hearing this month.

The government had paid over Rs 37 lakh as fees to senior counsels K K Singhvi and Anil Sakhare for eight hearings in the High Court,which had ruled: “The government resolution has been issued only for political ambitions and to favour students belonging to the SSC board.”

Singhvi was paid Rs 3.5 lakh per appearance and Rs 50,000 per joint conference,while Sakhare collected Rs 1.75 lakh per appearance and Rs 25,000 per joint conference from June 22 to July 6 last year. According to information from the school education department,this worked out to Rs 24 lakh for Singhvi (six appearances and six joint conferences),while Sakhare got Rs 15.25 for eight appearances and five joint conferences,of which Rs 2 lakh was deducted as tax. The amount was paid from the sanctioned budgetary provisions of the school education department.

The earlier year,the government had come up with another scheme,called the percentile system,also thrown out by the court. This one had attempted to devise a system to bring students from various boards onto a single scale.

Though the majority judgment in the percentile case had asked the government to form a core group to study the matter,that suggestion was not followed,the court pointed out in its judgment in the 90-per-cent-reservation case.