Supreme Court disapproves of Amit Shah’s statement on scrapping of 4pc Muslim quota in Karnataka

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, May 9

The Supreme Court on Tuesday disapproved of senior BJP leader and Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s statement on scrapping the four per cent quota for Muslims in government jobs and educational institutions in poll-bound Karnataka, saying a sub-judice issue should not be politicised.

A Bench of Justice KM Joseph, Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice A Amanullah said public functionaries should exercise caution in their statements about issues pending before courts.

“When the matter is pending before the court and there is a court order on Karnataka Muslim quota, then there should not be any political statements on the issue. It’s not appropriate. Some sanctity needs to be maintained,” it noted.

The top court was hearing petitions challenging the Karnataka government’s decision to scrap four per cent reservation for Muslims under OBC category in government jobs and educational institutions and distribute it equally to Vokkaligas and Lingayats in the state.

The comments from the Bench came after senior counsel Dushyant Dave, representing the petitioners, raised the issue and said every day the Union Home Minister was making statements on the issue which amounted to contempt of court.

“They (BJP leaders) are proudly saying they have withdrawn (quota for Muslims),” Dave told the Bench.

“If what you are saying is true, then we wonder why when the matter is sub-judice before the Supreme Court, there should be statements made by anybody as such?” Justice Nagarathna commented.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Karnataka Government, objected to Dave’s submission, saying the Bench had not been told about the “content and context” of Shah’s statement.

“I don’t wish to do politics here. He (Dave) may move an application. We don’t know what statement is being attributed to (Shah),” Mehta said, asserting any religion-based reservation was unconstitutional even as he maintained “We understand and respect the sentiment of the court.”

“Solicitor General making a statement in the court is not a problem but someone saying anything on a sub-judice matter outside the court is not appropriate…In 1971, the West Bengal CM was held for contempt for holding a press conference defending a rationing order that was the subject matter of a challenge before the court…”We may have reservations about reservations but we can’t let it be politicised in this manner…,” said Justice Joseph.

”I can’t respond to political [allegations] … I can’t shout like my learned friend (Dave)…,” Mehta said, adding the matter was being politicised before the court.

As Dave interjected to say, “This was not religion based,” Mehta said, “Lordships will have to control (Dave). Can’t let this become a fish market… So far no judge has controlled him…That’s the problem…Some judge will have to.

”Some sanity must prevail… There is no such statement (by Shah) to my knowledge. But in the (election) manifesto one is entitled… Even I can’t be instructed as to how to argue in a vitiated atmosphere,” Mehta went on.

At one point, Justice Joseph asked Dave to not shout and make political statements in the court.

The Bench deferred the hearing to July 25 after the Solicitor General said he was busy with the Constitution Bench hearing on the same sex marriage issue. However, he assured the top court that the earlier reservation regime would continue till the next date of hearing.

Dave said he will file an application and bring it on record the statements being made on the matter.

As Central Muslim Association’s counsel wanted the top court to restrain the press from publishing such speeches, Mehta asserted that media can’t be censored like this.

After the Karnataka Government’s March 27 decision – that came weeks before the May 10 assembly elections, Muslims will be eligible to vie for 10 per cent reservation under the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) category while the four per cent quota enjoyed by them for three decades stood distributed equally between Veerashaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas – considered to be numerically dominant and politically influential communities in the state.

The Supreme Court had on April 13 questioned the Karnataka government’s decision to scrap the four per cent reservation for Muslims under OBC category in government jobs and educational institutions, saying prima facie it appeared to be based on “fallacious assumptions”.