Karnataka SC and ST Quota Increase Challenged over 50% Ceiling and Commission Consultation

The news

The Karnataka government has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Karnataka High Court’s decision to strike down the state’s enhanced reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. A statement from the Chief Minister’s Office said the government appealed against the judgment that invalidated the increase of SC reservation from 15 per cent to 17 per cent and ST reservation from 3 per cent to 7 per cent. The appeal was filed within 16 days of the high court order.

The Congress government has framed the appeal as part of its broader effort to safeguard reservation for historically disadvantaged communities. It noted that the Assembly adopted a resolution on December 18, 2025, urging the Centre to include the 2022 law providing for enhanced reservation in the Constitution’s Ninth Schedule, which provides protection against judicial scrutiny. The government also reiterated its demand that the Centre provide constitutional protection to the enhanced quotas. The reservation hikes trace their origins to the recommendations of the Justice HN Nagamohan Das Commission, which proposed increasing SC and ST reservation and advised the government to secure the legislation from judicial review.

The government has continued recruitment processes despite the legal uncertainty. In February 2026, it approved the filling of 56,432 posts and reserved an additional 6 per cent of backlog vacancies for SC and ST candidates until the final outcome of the court proceedings. The high court last month struck down the increased quotas, stating that they breached the 50 per cent reservation ceiling set by the Supreme Court. It also referred to Clause (9) of Article 338 and Clause (9) of Article 338A, which mandate the Union and state governments to consult the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes on all major policy matters affecting the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes. “Notwithstanding the State’s legislative competence to enact the Act, it was mandatory for it to consult the commissions. Merely writing a letter after enacting the Act cannot be considered as consultation,” the court said in its order.

Which case set the 50% reservation ceiling?

The 50 per cent ceiling on reservations was laid down by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v Union of India in 1992. The court held that reservation in a year should generally not exceed 50 per cent, though it allowed for exceptional circumstances. The Ninth Schedule was added to the Constitution by the First Amendment in 1951 to protect certain laws from judicial review. In I R Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu in 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 can still be challenged if they violate the basic structure of the Constitution. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes were established under Article 338 and Article 338A respectively, with the latter created by the 89th Constitutional Amendment in 2003.

What did the High Court rule and why?

The Karnataka High Court struck down the enhanced quotas on two grounds. First, the increases breached the 50 per cent reservation ceiling set by the Supreme Court. Second, the state failed to consult the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes as required under Clause (9) of Article 338 and Clause (9) of Article 338A. The court held that a letter sent after enacting the Act did not amount to consultation, despite the state’s legislative competence to enact the law.

What has the state done to protect the quotas?

The Karnataka Assembly adopted a resolution on December 18, 2025, urging the Centre to include the 2022 law in the Constitution’s Ninth Schedule, which provides protection against judicial scrutiny. The government has also continued recruitment despite the legal uncertainty: in February 2026, it approved filling 56,432 posts and reserved an additional 6 per cent of backlog vacancies for SC and ST candidates until the final outcome of the proceedings. Separately, internal reservation for SCs is intended to distribute benefits more equitably among the most backward sub-groups within the category.

What is the next legal step?

The Supreme Court’s consideration of the appeal will determine the status of the enhanced quotas. Ninth Schedule inclusion would require action at the Union level, but it does not confer unconditional immunity from judicial review, as laws in the Ninth Schedule remain subject to challenge on the ground that they violate the basic structure of the Constitution.