Mumbai: Bombay High Court allows Maratha candidates to apply in EWS category, overturns MAT decision

File Photo

The Bombay High Court has quashed an order by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) that previously barred candidates from the Maratha community from applying for government jobs under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category.

The High Court, granting relief to Maratha candidates, stated that the MAT deviated from established legal principles, leading to "cascading effects."

A division bench comprising Justices Nitin M Jamdar and Manjusha A Deshpande heard petitions from over 100 candidates and the state government, challenging the MAT's February 2023 order.

The MAT had ruled that Maratha candidates could not avail themselves of the EWS quota when applying for specific government positions, including sub-inspector/tax assistant, clerk-typist roles, posts in the forest department, and engineering services advertised in 2019.

In 2018, the Maharashtra government granted education and job quotas to the Maratha community through the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Class Act. However, the Supreme Court later deemed the Act unconstitutional.

Subsequently, government resolutions (GRs) were issued, allowing candidates who initially applied under the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC) category to switch to the EWS quota for recruitment purposes.

Non-Maratha candidates who had initially applied under the EWS category challenged these GRs before the MAT. The tribunal sided with the challengers, disqualifying those who had originally applied under the SEBC category.

Also read: Bombay HC comes to rescue of teacher wrongfully sacked 15 years ago

The Bombay High Court, in its recent ruling, expressed that the state attempted to address a unique situation by enabling a class it considered prejudiced to compete for reservation benefits. The court highlighted that the MAT failed to provide specific findings on why it deemed the state's actions arbitrary.

The court stated, "The generalised observations in the impugned (MAT) order that SEBC candidates from the Maratha community scored higher marks imply that they were never entitled to SEBC reservation exceeded the scope of the service dispute and were unnecessary. The impugned order has deviated from established legal principles, leading to cascading effects and negatively impacting a substantial number of candidates," ultimately setting aside the MAT's order. (With inputs from agencies)