Mumbai: Maratha Reservation Hearing Postponed Until After Lok Sabha Elections

By Lokmat English Desk | Published: April 17, 2024 09:06 AM2024-04-17T09:06:32+5:302024-04-17T09:21:40+5:30

Mumbai: The next hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the decision to provide 10 percent reservation to the ...

Mumbai: Maratha Reservation Hearing Postponed Until After Lok Sabha Elections | Mumbai: Maratha Reservation Hearing Postponed Until After Lok Sabha Elections

Mumbai: Maratha Reservation Hearing Postponed Until After Lok Sabha Elections

Mumbai: The next hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the decision to provide 10 percent reservation to the Maratha community in government jobs and education has been shifted to the next date of hearing after the Lok Sabha elections. Admissions to educational institutions and government jobs under the Maratha Reservation Act will be subject to final orders on petitions, the High Court said on Tuesday.

Also Read | Mumbai Heatwave: April Sees Hottest Day in 15 Years as Temperatures Soar to 39.7°C


As the arguments on the petitions challenging the Maratha reservation are yet to be completed, the arguments of the advocate general and mediator are yet to be heard. A full bench headed by Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay, Justice Girish Kulkarni, and Justice  Justice Firdosh Pooniwalla posted the petitions for hearing on June 13.

Shukre Commission adopted the wrong method 
During Tuesday's hearing, senior advocate Pradeep Sancheti, appearing for the petitioners, argued in the court that the Shukre Commission had adopted a wrong method while conducting the survey. The information obtained through it was misanalyzed. 

This case is not personal
Bhunjagrao Pawar had earlier filed a petition before a division bench headed by Chief Justice Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Girish Kulkarni. At the time, Justice Kulkarni did not hear the petition. Pawar had filed a petition on Monday stating that the hearing should not take place before Justice Kulkarni again as he was the petitioner. The court rejected his application. There is no connection between that case and this case. It was a society dispute and the case was about reservation given to the Maratha community. The court dismissed Pawar's application saying the matter was not personal.

Open in app