The Maharashtra State Assembly had recently passed a bill allocating 10% reservation in education and government jobs to the Maratha community, based on the findings of the Justice (Retd.) Sunil B. Shukre-led Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC). However, this move has once again entered the judicial spotlight, as the Bombay High Court constituted a new three-judge bench on May 18, 2025, to evaluate the legality and constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024.

This is the third such legislative attempt in a decade, reflecting the community’s sustained demand and the legal complexity surrounding its classification as a Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC). The central issue now is whether the current framework and data supporting this latest Act can pass judicial scrutiny, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s 2021 judgment striking down a similar law on the grounds of breaching the 50% reservation ceiling.

Recent Judicial Development:

* On May 18, 2025, the Bombay High Court formed a new three-judge bench to hear the petitions challenging the 2024 Act.
* This step signals a renewed judicial review of the Act, which raises questions about:

* The validity of the Shukre Commission’s methodology
* The Act’s compliance with constitutional provisions
* Whether “exceptional circumstances” exist to justify exceeding the 50% cap

This hearing is crucial as it comes just ahead of upcoming local body elections, with the potential to influence political narratives across the state.

Key Provisions of the 2024 Maratha Reservation Act:

* Provides 10% reservation in education and government jobs over and above existing quotas.
* Applies only to those not in the creamy layer.
* Allows carry-forward of vacancies for up to five years.
* Includes penalties for non-compliance in admissions or appointments.
* Uses existing laws for issuing caste and validity certificates.

*Constitutional and Legal Framework:*
The Act claims legal backing from:

* Article 342A(3): Empowers states to prepare their own SEBC lists.
* Articles 15(4), 15(5): Allow special provisions for SEBCs in education.
* Article 16(4): Enables reservation in public employment for underrepresented backward classes.

However, it directly challenges the Supreme Court’s 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment and the 2021 ruling that reinforced the 50% reservation limit, declaring the previous SEBC Act (2018) unconstitutional.

Concerns Raised Against the Act:

* Rapid Data Collection: Critics question the Shukre Commission’s 9-day survey period and lack of transparency in data collection methods.
* Insufficient Evidence of Social Backwardness: The report emphasizes economic hardship over social or educational backwardness.
* Statistical Disputes: Claims like “94% of suicide cases are from Maratha farmers” and “84% fall in the non-creamy layer” are contested.
* Legal Viability: With total reservations in Maharashtra now reaching 62%, the act risks being struck down again unless exceptional grounds are proven.

Arguments in Favor:

* The Shukre Commission highlights rural poverty, land fragmentation, and educational backwardness among a large portion of the Maratha population.
* Underrepresentation in public services and professional education is cited as justification.
* Historical commissions, including the Gaikwad Commission, have recommended similar reservations.
* The Maratha population constitutes around 28% of the state, and many live under severe socio-economic strain.

Way Forward:

* The case underscores the need for a comprehensive socio-economic caste census to ensure data-backed policymaking.
* Courts are likely to examine whether quantifiable data justifies breaching the 50% cap.
* Future legislation must aim to balance reservation with merit, and focus on long-term structural reforms, not just electoral appeasement.

As the Bombay High Court reopens the legal debate, the outcome of this case will be pivotal—not just for the Maratha community, but for the future of reservation policy in India. The judiciary’s response to the SEBC Act 2024 could reset the boundaries of affirmative action and redefine what qualifies as “exceptional circumstances” in modern India.