Supreme Court Reserves Order On Tamil Nadu Plea In Conversion-quota Row
Supreme Court Reserves Order On Tamil Nadu Plea In Conversion-quota Row
M.U.H
07/08/202618
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday reserved its order on a plea by the Tamil Nadu government challenging a Madras High Court order, which held that a person converting to Islam was not entitled to claim reservation under the Backward Class (Muslim) category solely on the basis of conversion.
The matter was heard by a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar. Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Luthra appeared for the state government. The state government counsel vehemently argued for setting aside the high court order.
The state’s counsel argued that the March 9, 2024 order was intended to ensure that members of socially and educationally backward communities are not deprived of reservation benefits solely because of conversion to Islam.
It was argued that the state government’s order created a level playing field by preserving affirmative‑action benefits despite a change of religion.
A plea was moved before the high court by Sameer Ahamed, who converted from Hinduism to Islam in 2015, with the conversion being notified through a Gazette notification in 2016. He subsequently married according to Islamic rites and sought a certificate identifying him as belonging to the “Muslim Lebbai” community to avail reservation benefits.
His application was rejected by the tahsildar, prompting him to move the high court. The state government claimed it has the authority, based on the report of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission, to issue backward classes (Muslim) community certificates to eligible persons who had embraced Islam among the backward classes, most backward classes, denotified communities and Scheduled Castes (SCs).
In the apex court, the state government filed its plea through the District Collector, Thoothukudi district and the Revenue Divisional Officer. They were aggrieved by the declaration that Government Order (GO) No. 31 was unconstitutional and by the consequential findings that had statewide ramifications.
The state government’s appeal stated that the impugned judgment raises substantial questions concerning the permissible scope of interference with executive policy framed pursuant to the recommendation of an expert statutory commission.
On June 25, the high court held that a person converting to Islam was not entitled to claim reservation under the Backward Class (Muslim) category solely on the basis of conversion and declared unconstitutional the GO issued on March 9, 2024.
While striking down the GO, the high court held that it was contrary to binding judicial precedents of both the Supreme Court and the high court.
