Sealing the 50% Ceiling: Assessing the Foundations of the Numerical Upper Limit in Reservations

Abstract

There exists reservations regarding reservation policies. They have historically been regarded as a charity that stands in conflict with the ideals of equality and merit. The discourse surrounding the two ideals was rekindled in the recent judicial pronouncements on the reservations for the Maratha Community in 2021, underlining the equality debate and further in light of the merit issue in National Eligibility cum Entrance Test’s [“NEET”] examinations case in 2022. These two judgments have crafted a meaningful locus for reservations in contemporary India. In this jurisprudential context, the 50% reservation ceiling is observed as a right move towards curbing the extent of reservation. However, in actuality, it is more detrimental. The first part of the article sets the background of how the concept of affirmative action came into existence and its implications while briefly delving into the contemporary legal issues presented by the two judgments. The second part describes the origin of the ceiling and argues that it is judicial creation and constituent assembly did not set any numerical cap. The authors argue that an objective cap on reservation is an inadequate answer to a subjective problem. The last part of the article debunks the myth that reservation affects merit and efficiency - illustrating that there is no concrete evidence that efficiency dwindles because of reservation. The authors argue that the ceilings are protecting the traditional definition of merit. However, merit must be interpreted as overcoming the obstacles rather than mere numerical merit, as also observed by Justice D. Y. Chandrachud in the case challenging reservations in NEET examinations.