NEW DELHI — India’s Supreme Court on February 19 sent a batch of petitions questioning the 2019 increase in Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation in Madhya Pradesh to the state’s high court for prompt resolution.

The state cabinet approved raising the OBC quota in public jobs and education from 14% to 27% in 2019. Challengers argued the move violated constitutional limits on reservations. A bench led by Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe ruled that the Madhya Pradesh High Court stands best equipped to assess both the necessity and legality of this affirmative action.

“We are of the opinion that the High Court of Madhya Pradesh will be in the best position to consider, take a complete view of the need as well as the legality of the affirmative action for the state,” the bench stated in its order.

The justices instructed the chief justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court to form a special bench. That panel must hear and dispose of the writ petitions, special leave petitions, appeals and transferred cases within three months. The high court bench may also address any interim applications from involved parties.

The Supreme Court emphasized that states hold the prerogative to craft reservation policies as part of their constitutional duties. Still, such challenges belong first in the relevant state high court under Article 226. Bypassing that step to invoke Article 32 jurisdiction directly would prove inappropriate, the order noted.

To protect all sides, the top court urged swift action. “In view of the long pendency and also the urgency, it is requested that the bench to which the matters are assigned will take up and dispose of the challenges within three months from today,” it directed.

The bench stressed it offered no view on the petitions’ merits or any temporary measures while the high court deliberates. The remand aims to clear a backlog while ensuring local courts handle state-specific policy disputes.

This decision highlights the Supreme Court’s preference for high courts as initial forums in reservation matters. Similar cases have ping-ponged between apex and state courts in recent years, delaying outcomes for thousands seeking government posts and college seats in Madhya Pradesh.

The 27% OBC quota, if upheld, would align Madhya Pradesh with several other states pushing reservation ceilings higher. Opponents claim it breaches the 50% cap set by the landmark 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment, though recent amendments allow exceptions for socially backward groups.

Madhya Pradesh officials defended the hike as essential to address historical inequities among OBC communities, which form a significant voting bloc in the state. Petitioners, including job aspirants from general categories, warned of reverse discrimination.

Legal experts expect the high court to examine into fresh data on OBC backwardness and representation in state services. The three-month deadline adds pressure amid a packed judicial calendar.

Reservation debates continue to roil Indian politics and courts. Just last year, the Supreme Court split 6-1 in upholding sub-quotas for the most backward castes within OBC limits nationwide.