DR. K. KRISHNA MURTHY & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: [2010] 6 S.C.R. 972 · Decided: 11-05-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 9 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
(2010] 6 S.C.R. 972 
DR. K. KRISHNA MURTHY & ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 356 of 1994) 
MAY 11, 2010 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., R.V. RAVEENDRAN, 
D.K: JAIN, P. SATHASIVAM AND J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Constitution (Seventy-third) 
c Amendment Act, 1992 -
Constitution (Seventy-fourth) 
Amendment Act, 1992: 
Articles 243-0(4) and 243-T(4) - Elected local self-
government institutions - Reservation of Chairperson posts 
0 under - Constitutional validity of - Held: Is constitutionally 
valid - Said posts cannot be equated with solitary posts in the 
context of public employment - Article 243-0(4) provides a 
clear constitutional basis for reserving Chairperson positions 
in favour of SC and STs (in proportionate manner) and one-
third of all chairperson positions in each tier of the Panchayati 
E Raj Institutions in favour of women. 
Articles 243-0(6) and 243-T(6) - Reservations in favour 
of backward classes for occupying seats and Chairperson 
positions in Panchayat and Municipalities - Constitutional 
F validity of - Held: Are constitutionally valid - Provisions 
merely enable State Legislatures to reserve seats and 
chairperson posts in favour of backward classes - They do 
not provide guidance on how to identify backward classes and 
neither do they specify any principle for quantum of such 
G reservations - Concerns about disproportionate reservations 
should be raised by way of specific challenges against the 
State Legislations - Karnataka Panchayati Raj Act, 1993 -
Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 - Uttar Pradesh 
Kshetra Panchayat and Zilla Panchayat Act, 1961. 
H 
972 
DR. K. KRISHNA MURTHY & ORS. Ii. UNION OF 
973 
INDIA &ANR.· 
. 
Articles 243-0(6) and 243-T(6) - Reservations for OBCs A 
under the State Legislations - Claims as regard overbreadth 
in quantum of reservation - Held: Cannot be examined since 
there is no contemporaneous empirical data - Onus is on 
executive to conduct rigorous investigation into the patterns 
of backwardness that act as barriers to political participation 
B 
- Aggrieved party can challenge any State legislation enacted 
in pursuance to Articles 243-0(6) and 243-T(6) before High 
Court. 
Articles 243-0(6) and 243-T(6) - Upper ceiling - 50 % 
vertical reservations in favour of SC!ST!OBCs - Held: Not to 
C 
be breached in context of local self-government - Exceptions 
can only be made in order to safeguard the interests of 
Scheduled Tribes in the matter of their representation in 
Panchayats located in Scheduled Areas. 
D 
Articles 243-0(6) and 243-T(6) - Reservations in favour 
of backward classes - 'Backward classes' in Articles 243-0(6) 
and 243-T(6}, whether co-extensive with the 'socially and 
educationally backward classes' (SEBCs) contemplated 
under Articles 15(4) and 15(5) or with under-represented 
E 
backward classes as contemplated under Article 16(4)- Held: 
Identification of 'backward classes' under Articles 243-0(6) 
and 243-T(6) should be distinct from the identification of 
SEBCs for the purpose of Article 15(4) and that of backward 
classes for the purpose of Article 16 (4) - Social and 
F 
economic backwardness does not necessarily coincide with 
political backwardness. 
Articles 243-0 and 243-T - Reservations in elected local 
self government -
Nature and purpose of -
Held: Is 
considerably different from that of higher education and G 
public employment, as contemplated under Articles 15(4) and 
16(4) - Articles 243-0 and 243-T form a distinct and 
independent constitutional basis for affirmative action and 
principles that have been evolved in relation to reservation 
H 
.. 
97 4 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[201 O] 6 S.C.R. 
, A policies enabled by Articles 15(4) and 16(4) cannot be readily 
applied in the context of local self-government. 
A1ticles 243-0 and 243-T - Reservations in local self-
government - Exclusion of 'creamy layer' - Held: There 
8 cannot be exclusion of creamy layer in the context of local 
self-government - Reservations in local self-government are 
intended to directly benefit the community as a whole, 1ather 
than just the elected representatives - Exclusion of 'creamy 
layer' may be feasible as well as desirable in the context of 
C reservations for education and employment. 
Right to vote and contest elections - Nature of - Held: 
Does not have the status of fundamental rights - They are in 
the nature of legal rights which can be controlled through 
legislative means -

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.