Application challenging the implementation of Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 held as ‘not maintainable’

Lisa Coutinho | Pravin Gandhi College of Law | 25th March 2020 

B K Pavithra & Ors v. Union of India & OrsM. A. No. 1323 of 2019

Facts of the case:

227 applicants have filed a miscellaneous application in the Supreme Court seeking relief against the judgement passed by the Supreme Court earlier upholding the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority to Government Servants Promoted on the Basis of Reservations (to the Posts in the Civil Services of the State) Act 2018. The following are the reliefs sought:

1. Direct the State of Karnataka to implement ‘post based reservation’ in terms of the judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court in R.K. Sabharwal vs State of Punjab and to re-work all promotions on ‘post’ basis before any further action.
2. Direct the State of Karnataka to apply ‘creamy layer’ at the entry level and to exclude individuals belonging to SC and ST who no longer require reservation under Article 16(4-A) of the Constitution.
3. Restrain the State and its instrumentalities from taking any action where, no exercise is undertaken for that service or cadre on adequacy or where there is adequacy of representation particular when every specific application of order in relation to each cadre must be Nagaraj compliant.

Issue raised:

The main issue in this case was whether the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the applicants are maintainable or not.

Judgement:

The Apex Court clarified that nomenclature of an application is of no consequence and courts must access the contents and reliefs sought in the application to determine what is the true nature of the application.

The Court noted that the judgement in B K Pavitra II concerned the constitutional validity of the Reservation Act 2018, and not the actions taken thereunder or in pursuance of its implementation. The present applications seek to challenge the action of the government to carry into effect the provisions of the Reservation Act.

The Supreme Court has held that the Miscellaneous Applications are not maintainable. While dismissing the petition, it has left it open to the applicants to pursue independent remedies as available in law.