“Reservation is necessary for transcending caste and not for the perpetuating it. Reservation has to be used in a limited sense otherwise it will perpetuate castism in society.” – Justice S.H Kapadia
The Chhattisgarh HC in the case of Abhay Kumar Kispotta and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others observed that “if it is held that Article 15(3) of the Constitution allows reservation for women and, accordingly, it can be provided in public employment, then such an interpretation of Article 15(3) of the Constitution would be nothing but to nullify the main provision of public employment under Article 16(2) of the Constitution prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex”.
The bench of Chief Justice Arup Kumar Goswami and Narendra Kumar Vyas was hearing a petition in which Clause-5 of the advertisement dated December 8, 2021, issued by the Public Service Commission for direct recruitment in the service by which only female candidates were made eligible, was challenged along with the contention that it is violative of Articles 14,15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
The judges relying on the judgement of Indra Sawhney, further held that ” The aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court clarifies that reservation for women in public employment cannot be under Article 15(3) of the Constitution and Article 16(2) of the Constitution bars reservation on the ground of sex and the reservation can be under Article 16 of the Constitution. Women en bloc cannot be brought under the category of backward class of citizens and, therefore, they are separately categorized as a vulnerable class for which there exists no provision in the Constitution to provide reservation.”