The PIL was moved by an advocate practicing before the Kerala High Court, challenging the reservation at the ICSR as being unconstitutional.
Apart form the reservation of 50 percent seats for Muslim candidates, the plea claimed that there is an additional 10 percent reservation for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Moreover, ICSR has also waived tuition fee for the reserved category candidates, it was pointed out.
It was contended that since the respondents are “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, granting 50% reservation on the basis of religion of the candidates, is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.
In the context of Kerala, Muslims are included in SEBC and OBC lists but the plea said that the reservation at ICSR is not reservation granted to an OBC or SEBC category, but to Muslims based on their religious identity.
Even assuming that the reservation is only for Muslims belonging to SEBC and OBC groups, the petitioner argued that granting reservation to only one among the backward classes, to the exclusion of others, is unconstitutional and violates the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992.
Moreover, the total reservation in the Institute exceeds 50%, and hence the violative of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney & Ors. v Union of India & Ors. and reiterated in Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v Chief Minister, Maharashtra (Maratha’s reservation case).
The PIL also alleged that the political executive is extending undue benefits to a particular religious community which is against the constitutional value of secularism.
“The State should never be party to an illegal attempt to increase the number of persons in the administrative services from a particular religious community. Cadres of the Administrative Services play a pivotal role in the administration of this diverse country. Any attempt to manipulate the composition of the Services will have deleterious effect,” the plea stated
Source: Barandbench
