SRINAGAR: In a significant development, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that all appointments made under the existing reservation rules will be contingent on the outcome of an ongoing legal challenge. A division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi issued this directive while hearing a petition questioning the constitutional validity of various amendments to the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules.
The petitioners, Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, Ishrat Nabi, Ishfaq Ahmad Dar, Shahid Bashir Wani, and Amir Hamid Lone, have alleged that the amendments introduced through multiple government orders from 2020 to 2024 undermine equitable access to government jobs and educational opportunities. They claim the amendments have drastically reduced open merit seats in government recruitment and educational institutions from 57 per cent to 33 per cent and cut the Resident of Backward Area (RBA) quota from 20 per cent to 10 per cent. Conversely, the amendments have increased reservations for Scheduled Tribes (ST) from 10 per cent to 20 per cent, Social Caste from 2 per cent to 8 per cent, ALC from 3 per cent to 4 per cent, and PHC from 3 per cent to 4 per cent. Additionally, new categories such as children of defence personnel (3 per cent), children of police personnel (1 per cent), and sportspersons (2 per cent) have been introduced.
The petitioners have described these amendments as unconstitutional and discriminatory, arguing that they violate the principle of equality by disproportionately favouring certain groups at the expense of open merit and RBA candidates. They have specifically challenged several government orders and notifications, including SO 176 dated March 15, 2024, SO 127 dated April 20, 2020, and SO 305 dated May 21, 2024. The petitioners assert that these orders undermine the spirit of the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005, and are ultra vires to the Constitution.
During the hearing, the court also took note of the petitioners’ plea for broader reforms in the reservation policy. They have requested the court declare several provisions of the amended rules, including Rules 4, 5, 13, 15, 18, 21, and 23, unconstitutional. They urged the court to direct the authorities to issue fresh recruitment notifications based on the unamended 2005 rules. The petitioners have also suggested forming a high-level commission, headed by a retired High Court judge and including members from various communities, to recommend a rational reservation policy based on population percentages. Additionally, they have called for enforcing a 50 per cent ceiling for open merit and general category reservations, in line with constitutional principles.
The court, while acknowledging the complexities of the case, has sought the assistance of the Advocate General to provide legal clarity on the matter. The next hearing has been scheduled for December 27, with the court reiterating that any appointments made under the current reservation rules will remain subject to the final verdict. This ruling underscores the importance of ensuring fairness and constitutional compliance in framing reservation policies that impact recruitment and educational opportunities across Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
