In SC, MP cites ‘deep-rooted exclusion’ to justify OBC quota hike that breaks 50% ceiling

The state government affidavit dated September 23, 2025, referred to some of findings of the Mahajan Commission appointed by the then Congress government in 1980 as well as the reports of the Madhya Pradesh Backward Classes Commission (MPBCC).

It said that “the Mahajan Commission (in its 1983 report), after extensive field studies across the State, recommended 35% reservation for OBC, having found them to be socially, educationally, and economically backward. Its detailed survey constitutes valid and quantifiable data supporting the increase. The State Backward Classes Commission has also reaffirmed this position, listing 94 OBC castes/sub-castes engaged predominantly in traditional, menial, and agriculture-related occupations, reflecting their continuing marginalisation.”

The affidavit said that Annual Reports of the MPBCC of the years 1996-97, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 also “recommended for enhanced reservation”.

While the 1996-97 Report recommended raising the limit from 14% to 27%, the 2000-01 report recommended enhancing the limit to 35%, the state said.

The affidavit pointed out that “as latest as in the year 2023, at the behest of the state government, a detailed study was conducted by Dr B R Ambedkar University of Social Sciences, underscoring a stark disconnect between the demographic strength and representation of OBCs in Madhya Pradesh. The report reflects that OBCs continue to face deep-rooted social discrimination, exclusion, and marginalisation—confined to traditional caste-based occupations, segregated localities, and lacking access to basic amenities—illustrating that despite numbers, they remain socially backward in practice, and broad-based social reforms are needed alongside reservation.”

Countering arguments that raising the limits would breach the 50% limit set by the SC in the 1992 Indira Sawhney case, the State said the judgement “makes it clear that while 50% is the general rule, the Court recognised that exceptional circumstances such as regional imbalances, remoteness, or overwhelming backwardness may justify departure”.

The matter had reached the courts following the amendment proposed to be made by the state legislature to the MP Lok Seva (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, which gave 15%, 18% and 14% reservation in Class I and Class II posts and 13%, 20% and 14% reservation in Class III posts to SCs, STs and OBCs, respectively.

In September 1995, this was further revised to 15%, 23% and 27% in Class I and II posts and 13%, 23% and 27% in Class III posts.

In December 2001, the President sent back the Bill citing the 50% upper limit following which the state amended the law in April 2002 making provision for 16%, 20% and 14% reservation on all classes of posts for SCs, STs and OBCs.

In November 2002, the state again amended the law to increase OBC reservation to 27% but “the President neither gave assent to the Bill, nor withheld it, nor returned it to the Governor with a request for the state legislature to reconsider it. In view of this prevailing position, a decision was taken at the level of the state government to initiate the exercise of increasing the reservation in favour of OBCs to 27%.”

Following this, by “Resolution dated 30.06.2003, it was concluded that special circumstances prevail within the State… thereby justifying the enhancement of overall reservation in posts and services in the state beyond 50%, and increasing the reservation for Other Backward Classes from 14% to 27%.”

This was challenged before the MP High Court which quashed the Resolution on October 13, 2014. Challenge to this is pending before the SC.

In March 2019, the State promulgated an ordinance enhancing the OBC reservation from 14% to 27%. This too was challenged before the HC which by interim order dated March 19, stayed the enhanced reservation, but restricted it to the field of medical education.