{"id":27827,"date":"2020-08-27T09:30:30","date_gmt":"2020-08-27T09:30:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dinnews.in\/?p=27827"},"modified":"2020-08-27T09:30:30","modified_gmt":"2020-08-27T09:30:30","slug":"sc-says-its-2004-verdict-on-sub-classification-of-scsts-needs-to-be-reconsidered","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/?p=27827","title":{"rendered":"SC says its 2004 verdict on sub-classification of SC\/STs needs to be reconsidered"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court Thursday held that its 2004 verdict holding that states do not have the power to further sub-classify the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, for grant of quotas in jobs and admissions to educational institutions, needs to be revisited.<\/p>\n<p>A five-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said the 2004 verdict of a constitution bench in the E V Chinnaiah case needs to be reconsidered and, therefore, the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate direction.<\/p>\n<p>The bench, also comprising Justices Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, M R Shah and Aniruddha Bose, said in its view the 2004 verdict was not correctly decided and states can make laws to give preferential treatment by subclassifying caste within SC\/STs.<\/p>\n<p>The bench referred the case filed by the Punjab government against the high court order before CJI Justice S A Bobde for setting up of a larger bench to revisit the earlier verdict.<\/p>\n<p>The Punjab and Haryana high court had struck down a state law empowering the government to sub-classify SC\/STs for grant of quotas.<\/p>\n<p>The high court had relied on the 2004 verdict of the apex court and held that the Punjab government was not empowered to undertake the exercise of sub classifying SC\/STs.<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court Thursday held that its 2004 verdict holding that states do not have the power to further sub-classify the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, for grant of quotas in jobs and admissions to educational institutions, needs to be revisited. A five-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said the 2004 verdict of a constitution bench in the E V Chinnaiah case needs to be reconsidered and, therefore, the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate direction. The bench, also comprising Justices Indira Banerjee, Vineet&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":27525,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[8,4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27827"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=27827"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27827\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27829,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27827\/revisions\/27829"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/27525"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=27827"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=27827"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dinnews.in\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=27827"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}