Court holds State's executive orders re-declaring 77 and 37 classes as OBCs unauthorized under 2012 legislation; candidates with such certificates to be treated as general category in entrance exams
In a landmark judgment dated August 12, 2026, the Calcutta High Court (Division Bench) invalidated the notifications issued by the State of West Bengal in May and June 2025 that sought to re-declare 77 and 37 classes of persons as Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The Court held that these notifications were issued without lawful authority and are therefore void ab initio. Consequently, OBC certificates issued pursuant to these notifications, including one obtained by the appellant Shreyasi Dhang in April 2026, have been declared invalid.
Background and Legal Context:
Prior to 2010, West Bengal recognized 66 classes as OBCs for reservation purposes under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. Subsequent notifications in 2010-2012 attempted to add 77 and 37 classes, dividing OBC into two categories: OBC-A (10% reservation) and OBC-B (7% reservation), under the West Bengal Backward Classes Reservation (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act, 2012. These notifications and the categorization were challenged in multiple Public Interest Litigations (PILs).
In May 2024, a coordinate Bench of this Court struck down the inclusion of these additional classes and the OBC-A and OBC-B categorization, holding them invalid for lack of proper survey and due to being religion-specific. Although the State filed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in the Supreme Court, the earlier judgment remained effective.
The State nonetheless issued fresh notifications in May and June 2025 to re-declare these classes as OBCs under the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993. These notifications were challenged, and an interim order of stay was initially granted by this Court in June 2025, but was stayed by the Supreme Court in July 2025, temporarily reviving the notifications.
However, after the new State Government withdrew the SLPs, this Court's earlier order was revived, and the notifications of 2025 were held to be issued without any legislative or executive authority.
Key Findings of the Court:
1. Exclusive Legislative Field: The Court found that the 2012 Act was the special legislation governing OBC reservation in State services and posts. Therefore, the State could not lawfully resort to executive power under Article 16(4) of the Constitution via the 1993 Act to re-declare OBC classes. The notifications issued under the 1993 Act in 2025 were thus without authority and void ab initio.
2. Invalidity of OBC Certificates: The appellant's OBC certificate dated April 13, 2026, was obtained under the void notifications. Hence, it was invalid. All OBC certificates issued between May 8, 2025, and June 12, 2025, and up to their formal withdrawal in May 2026 are void.
3. Effect on Competitive Examinations: Candidates who claimed OBC status in examinations like NEET and JENPAS (UG) 2026 based on these invalid certificates must be treated as general category candidates. However, persons belonging to OBC classes recognized prior to 2010 may apply afresh for valid certification.
4. Legal Precedent: The Court relied extensively on the Supreme Court's decision in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) which establishes that executive instructions for reservation cannot operate contrary to existing statutory provisions, especially when a special legislative enactment is already in place.
Implications:
This judgment clarifies that the State's power to declare OBC classes must be exercised under valid legislative authority and not by executive orders issued under a repealed or non-applicable Act. The decision is significant for candidates who have obtained OBC status under the disputed notifications, impacting their reservation benefits in State and national level entrance examinations.
The Court has left the discretion to the State and competent authorities to take appropriate remedial measures for candidates genuinely belonging to pre-2010 OBC classes to avoid undue hardship.
Conclusion:
The Calcutta High Court's ruling reinforces the primacy of statutory law over executive notifications concerning reservation policies. It underscores the necessity for proper legislative backing when altering or expanding backward classes for reservation purposes. The decision will have wide ramifications for reservation policy implementation in West Bengal.
Bottom Line:
Reservation - OBC certificate issued on basis of notifications re-declaring classes as OBCs, which were held void ab initio, is invalid - Persons claiming benefit under such certificates in State and national entrance examinations are liable to be treated as general category candidates, subject to fresh certification if covered by pre-2010 valid OBC classes.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, West Bengal Backward Classes Reservation (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation in Services and Posts) Act, 2012, West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993
Shreyasi Dhang v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2990463
