Express News Service
RAIPUR: Amid the extended disagreement over the reservation modification invoice, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel on Sunday stated his authorities has replied to 10 questions requested by Governor Anusuiya Uikey on the proposed legislation.
“We have responded to the queries of the Governor, though there is no such procedure (to reply) laid down in the Constitution. She insisted that until she received the responses to her questions, she would not sign the bill. We think the assent should come now,” stated Baghel.
Raj Bhawan sources advised this paper that the Governor’s choice would come after she was satisfied by the justifications given by the state authorities. The particular session of the state Assembly on December 2 unanimously handed and adopted by voice-vote the Chhattisgarh Public Service (ST-SC-OBC Reservation) Amendment Bill taking the quota within the state to 76% with the tribal share being raised to 32%.
In the modification invoice, the proposed quota for Scheduled Caste is 13%, Other Backward Classes (OBCs) 27% and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) will get 4% reservations. Senior BJP chief Brijmohan Agrawal demanded the responses given to the Governor’s questions be made public. The ruling Congress, claiming that the state authorities had taken each technical and authorized floor into consideration forward of adopting the invoice within the House, has alleged that the BJP is indulging in politics on reservation utilizing the Raj Bhawan.
The Governor dominated out any politics behind her choice. “Only after knowing the credible details and the reasons, I will consider giving the assent,” she affirmed. An argument has erupted within the state on what’s being seemed upon as a delay on the a part of the governor to signal the quota payments.
The ruling Congress has accused the opposition BJP of creating makes an attempt to cease approval of the payments and has demanded fast motion on the a part of the governor to resolve the lingering challenge of caste-based quota within the state. Critics of the proposed Bill say that even after the governor provides assent to the invoice, it will be powerful to implement its provisions because the Supreme Court has already put up a cap of fifty% on reservations for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, and the Other Backward Classes.
In September final 12 months, the High Court put aside the state authorities’s 2012 order to lift the quota to 58% in authorities jobs and admissions in academic establishments. The courtroom had stated reservation exceeding the 50% ceiling was unconstitutional.
Following are the Governor’s 10 questions:
Was the opinion of the legislation division taken earlier than bringing forth the reservation modification invoice?
Under what situations are the reservation over 50% binding?
The report of the quantifiable knowledge fee (on SC-ST) must be produced. Did the federal government combination the info whereas making ready the payments?
What was the scenario that led to growing the quota restrict past 50%?
Was there a separate provision within the legislation introduced for the EWS reservation?
Was any committee constituted earlier than elevating the reservation ceiling?
Why are the ST-SC candidates not being chosen for state authorities jobs for the sanctioned posts?
How do the STs/SCs lag behind socially, economically and educationally?
Any report to make sure that the effectivity of the state administration could be maintained with the reservations?
The excessive courtroom in September this 12 months quashed 58% reservation as “unconstitutional,” how will the invoice with the next quota be defended?
RAIPUR: Amid the extended disagreement over the reservation modification invoice, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel on Sunday stated his authorities has replied to 10 questions requested by Governor Anusuiya Uikey on the proposed legislation.
“We have responded to the queries of the Governor, though there is no such procedure (to reply) laid down in the Constitution. She insisted that until she received the responses to her questions, she would not sign the bill. We think the assent should come now,” stated Baghel.
Raj Bhawan sources advised this paper that the Governor’s choice would come after she was satisfied by the justifications given by the state authorities. The particular session of the state Assembly on December 2 unanimously handed and adopted by voice-vote the Chhattisgarh Public Service (ST-SC-OBC Reservation) Amendment Bill taking the quota within the state to 76% with the tribal share being raised to 32%.
In the modification invoice, the proposed quota for Scheduled Caste is 13%, Other Backward Classes (OBCs) 27% and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) will get 4% reservations. Senior BJP chief Brijmohan Agrawal demanded the responses given to the Governor’s questions be made public. The ruling Congress, claiming that the state authorities had taken each technical and authorized floor into consideration forward of adopting the invoice within the House, has alleged that the BJP is indulging in politics on reservation utilizing the Raj Bhawan.
The Governor dominated out any politics behind her choice. “Only after knowing the credible details and the reasons, I will consider giving the assent,” she affirmed. An argument has erupted within the state on what’s being seemed upon as a delay on the a part of the governor to signal the quota payments.
The ruling Congress has accused the opposition BJP of creating makes an attempt to cease approval of the payments and has demanded fast motion on the a part of the governor to resolve the lingering challenge of caste-based quota within the state. Critics of the proposed Bill say that even after the governor provides assent to the invoice, it will be powerful to implement its provisions because the Supreme Court has already put up a cap of fifty% on reservations for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, and the Other Backward Classes.
In September final 12 months, the High Court put aside the state authorities’s 2012 order to lift the quota to 58% in authorities jobs and admissions in academic establishments. The courtroom had stated reservation exceeding the 50% ceiling was unconstitutional.
Following are the Governor’s 10 questions:
Was the opinion of the legislation division taken earlier than bringing forth the reservation modification invoice?
Under what situations are the reservation over 50% binding?
The report of the quantifiable knowledge fee (on SC-ST) must be produced. Did the federal government combination the info whereas making ready the payments?
What was the scenario that led to growing the quota restrict past 50%?
Was there a separate provision within the legislation introduced for the EWS reservation?
Was any committee constituted earlier than elevating the reservation ceiling?
Why are the ST-SC candidates not being chosen for state authorities jobs for the sanctioned posts?
How do the STs/SCs lag behind socially, economically and educationally?
Any report to make sure that the effectivity of the state administration could be maintained with the reservations?
The excessive courtroom in September this 12 months quashed 58% reservation as “unconstitutional,” how will the invoice with the next quota be defended?
