The Supreme Court refused to hear the OBC reservation in the all-India quota of Tamil Nadu medical admissions , saying that political parties of Tamil Nadu can go to the High Court in this case .
The Supreme Court said that the reservation of rights fundamental right is not the law is. And Article 32 is available only to those whose fundamental rights are being violated .
Political parties in Tamil Nadu jointly petitioned to implement 50% quota for obc in medical seats as per state law . The Supreme Court asked for this to go to the High Court.
Supreme Court Comment
Hearing a bench of Supreme Court Justices L Nageswara Rao, Justices Krishna Murari and Justice Ravindra Bhatt, held that no one can claim the right to reservation as a fundamental right. Refusal to grant reservation cannot be considered a violation of fundamental rights of anyone. The court asked the petitioner to withdraw his petition and go to the Madras High Court. The Supreme Court said that reservation is not a fundamental right but a convenience that is given by political parties.
What is the matter
Tamil Nadu political parties had put a petition in the Supreme Court together and colleges had sought due to no reservation for obc their constitutional is violating the rights of political parties, the Center transmitted by All India quota Tamil Nadu under There was a demand to impose 50% obc quota in the medical colleges of the state. Presently, 69% reservation already exists inside Tamil Nadu. These parties demanded that 50% of its reservation be given in the obc quota because non-availability of their fundamental rights is being violated.
read more – FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS / Fundamental Rights
Violation of fundamental rights
Fundamental rights have been provided between Articles 12 to 35 of the Constitution . The constitution guarantees fundamental rights. If Parliament passes a law that is violating fundamental rights, the court can repeal it. According to Article 32, if the fundamental rights of a person are violated, then the person can be enforced directly by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has provided that under Article 226 , when the concerned party has the option of staying through the High Court, it should first go to the High Court .