What is the history of reservation? 

• Articles 15 and 16 guarantee equality to all citizens in any policy of the government and public employment respectively. 
• In order to achieve social justice, they also enable special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes or OBC, Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). 
• Reservations for SC and ST are fixed at 15% and 7.5% respectively, in jobs, educational institutions and public sector undertakings (PSU) at the central level. 
• It was in 1990, when V. P. Singh was Prime Minister, that 27% reservation for OBC was implemented in central government employment based on Mandal Commission (1980) recommendations. 
• Subsequently in 2005, reservation was enabled for OBC, SC and ST in educational institutions including private institutions. 
• In 2019, 10% reservation was enabled for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) among the unreserved category. 

Indra Sawhney case

• The 27% reservation for OBC was upheld by the Supreme Court in the Indra Sawhney case (1992). 
• It opined that caste is a determinant of class in the Indian context. However, in order to uphold the basic structure of equality, it fixed a cap of 50% for reservation unless there are exceptional circumstances. 
• The court also provided for exclusion of creamy layer from OBC.

Why in News?

• The Supreme Court has refused to stay the Patna High Court’s order, setting aside the increase in reservation for the backward and extremely backward classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Bihar from 50% to 65% in public employment and educational institutions.
• The Bihar government in 2023 had amended the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (For Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1991 increasing the reservation to 65%. The increased reservation reduced the space for those from the open merit category to 35%.
• Patna HC had declared the amendment as ultra vires the Constitution and violative of equality clause under Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.
• The high court ruled that the state should introspect on the reservation percentage within the 50% limit, and exclude the “creamy layer” from the benefits