Officials said the quota traces back to a July 2014 ordinance promulgated by the then Congress-led administration under former chief minister Prithviraj Chavan. Under constitutional rules, such ordinances must be approved by the state legislature within six weeks. The measure was never passed by the Assembly, causing it to lapse automatically later that year after a change in government.
The Social Justice Department’s resolution states that since the ordinance expired without legislative approval, it had no legal force for nearly a decade. The latest order, authorities said, merely removes the outdated administrative reference to the quota from official records.
The proposal originated after studies conducted between 2008 and 2013 examined the socio-educational status of sections of the Muslim community. Committees appointed during that period concluded that some groups were socially and educationally backward and recommended reservation benefits. Shortly before the 2014 Assembly elections, the state announced a 5% quota covering education and public employment, prompting political debate and legal challenges.
In October 2014, the Bombay High Court permitted the continuation of reservation in educational admissions but stayed the employment component, observing that available data did not adequately justify job quotas. After elections that month, a new BJP-Shiv Sena alliance government assumed office and did not pursue fresh legislation to revive the policy. Over the following years, discussions continued on whether benefits could instead be extended through existing backward-class categories, but no separate statutory quota was enacted.
Legal analysts note that the latest cancellation is administrative rather than substantive, as the policy had long been inoperative. Still, the move is expected to reignite political debate over reservation frameworks and minority welfare measures in the state.
Policy experts say the episode underscores the importance of legislative backing for quota decisions, particularly those involving employment, which require robust data and constitutional scrutiny. Any future attempt to introduce similar measures would likely need fresh empirical studies, legislative approval, and judicial review.
.jpg)
