Justice Abhay S. A vacation bench headed by Oka refused to entertain special leave petitions filed by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission and the state government, questioning the validity of the May 31 judgment of the high court.
Rejecting the petitions, the bench, also comprising Justice Rajesh Bindal, said it did not find any error in the high court's judgment.
In its judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court said that once reservation has already been provided statutorily under the EWS category, as well as by providing reservation for the backward class on account of social backwardness, further socio-economic criteria Giving benefits under this will also cause loss. Violation of the 50 per cent limit imposed by the Supreme Court and recognized by the framers of the Constitution.
It said that the socio-economic criteria introduced by the Human Resources Department of the Government of Haryana was clearly arbitrary and an act of discrimination made by similarly situated persons and the benefit should not be given to any individual. The writ petitions filed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court argued that the 5 per cent bonus point provided on different accounts is grossly violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution and creates an artificial divide between equal people on the basis of residence. Classification has been made. , family, income, place of birth and position in society.
It said that before deciding the socio-economic parameters, neither quantitative data was collected nor any comprehensive study was conducted.
Rejecting the petitions, the bench, also comprising Justice Rajesh Bindal, said it did not find any error in the high court's judgment.
In its judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court said that once reservation has already been provided statutorily under the EWS category, as well as by providing reservation for the backward class on account of social backwardness, further socio-economic criteria Giving benefits under this will also cause loss. Violation of the 50 per cent limit imposed by the Supreme Court and recognized by the framers of the Constitution.
It said that the socio-economic criteria introduced by the Human Resources Department of the Government of Haryana was clearly arbitrary and an act of discrimination made by similarly situated persons and the benefit should not be given to any individual. The writ petitions filed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court argued that the 5 per cent bonus point provided on different accounts is grossly violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution and creates an artificial divide between equal people on the basis of residence. Classification has been made. , family, income, place of birth and position in society.
It said that before deciding the socio-economic parameters, neither quantitative data was collected nor any comprehensive study was conducted.
