The constitutional bench of the apex court, while hearing a plea under Maratha Quota case, issued a notice in furtherance of the writ petition which challenged 102nd Constitutional Amendment.
The petition has been filed by Shiv Sangram, a political party based in Maharashtra and Vinayakrao T. Mete, who is the leader of this party. Apparently, he is being tagged along with the Maratha Quota cases.
With the 102nd constitutional amendment, Article 333B had been added which provided for a Commission for the socially and educationally backward classes. The Commission came to be addressed as National Commission for Backward Classes.
Moreover, Article 342A states that the President, upon consultation with the Governor of a particular State, shall specify socially and educationally backward classes and which would be deemed to be one for the purposes of Indian Constitution in relation to that particular State or Union Territory.
In the instant case, the main issue is whether the 102nd constitutional amendment, in any way, affects the power of State Legislature to declare a particular caste as socially and educationally backward class.
The matter had been referred to constitutional bench by three-judge bench and they observed that until now no authoritative pronouncement has been made on the interpretation of the provisions inserted by the introduction of 102nd constitutional amendment.
The constitutional bench, however, repudiated the petition and stated that the case is unfit to be heard under Article 32 and the petitioner should challenge the respective statutory provisions before the High Court in an appropriate writ petition.