The Andhra Pradesh Reservation (in favour of socially and educationally backward classes of Muslims) Ordinance 2007 created a new group under the head “E” in the already existing Backward Classes (BCs) list for the purpose of providing reservation to Muslims. According to the ordinance, about 15 groups of Muslims would get the benefit of reservation, while keeping about 10 sub-sects outside the ambit of reservation.

Without passing any interim order, a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan sought reply from the Andhra Pradesh Government whether the creamy layer had been excluded or not from the benefit of the reservation. The court has fixed September 28 as the next date of hearing.

Senior advocate Arun Jaitley informed the court that the matter had to be heard urgently as the state Government would finalise the admission process by September 30.

Another advocate opposing the ordinance, said the state Government had failed to follow the Indra Sawhney (Mandal case) judgment excluding the creamy layer among the community from taking the benefit of reservation.

However, senior advocate Indra Jaising said there was no provision to decide the issue of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) among the Muslims.

She submitted that a committee had examined the lists of 24 sub-sects among the community and rejected 10 of them from availing the benefit of reservation.

Jaising said since at this stage procedure for admission had almost been completed, the court should refrain from passing any interim order and the admissions would be subject to the outcome of the judgment.

The petitioners have questioned the present ordinance contending that when the appeal against the earlier one was pending before the apex court how the state Government can come out with a fresh one.

The state Government’s June 21, 2005 ordinance granting five per cent reservation to Muslims in education and jobs by declaring the entire community as backward class was struck down by the High Court as illegal and unconstitutional. The appeal against it is pending in the apex court.

The High Court had held that reservation on the basis of religion violates Article 14, 15 (1) and 16 (2), following which the state filed an appeal in the apex court.

The apex court while listing the appeal along with similar writ petitions on January 4, 2006, ordered status quo with regard to the admissions and appointments already made for the said academic year but refused to extend the relief for the current academic year.