AIIMS reservation issue likely to rock Monsoon Session
Political opposition to a recent Supreme Court order on question of reservation in AIIMS could hamper the smooth functioning of Monsoon Session of Parliament.
New Delhi: Political opposition to a recent Supreme Court order on the question of reservation in AIIMS could hamper the smooth functioning of the Monsoon Session of Parliament with non-Congress and non-BJP parties planning to make it a big issue.
Talking to reporters, JD(U) president Sharad Yadav said, "We want government to act on this issue. Otherwise Opposition will raise it in a big way in the coming session."
The Monsoon Session of Parliament begins on August 05.
The issue was raised vociferously at the all-party meeting called by the government yesterday with most participants favouring corrective steps against the recent judgement of the Constitutional bench of SC against the reservation policy for SC/ST/OBC at the medical institute.
The two parties in the case were the faculty association of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences and the Union of India.
"If the judgement is implemented, reservation will only be applicable for group C and D posts and would be practically scrapped at all higher levels."
"Leaders at the meeting were of the unanimous view that unless the matter was resolved before the ensuing session of Parliament, its functioning would be difficult," Yadav said.
PMK leader Anbumani Ramdoss today met Yadav at his residence where he expressed strong reservations against the judgement and stressed on the need to combat it.
DMK chief Karunanidhi had called up Yadav yesterday and expressed his support on the issue.
Yadav has also held talks in this regard with CPI(M)`s Sitaram Yechury and leaders of SP and BSP.
Yadav said it was agreed at the meeting that if the government did not have any immediate solutions before the Monsoon Session, it should come out with a Constitutional Amendment Bill so that the above judgement was completely nullified.
The meeting also discussed the need for the government to get the judgement stayed immediately so that the functioning of the Monsoon Session is not disturbed. Yadav said his party had advised the government to resolve the matter at the earliest, for social justice in the country and in the interest of the functioning of the Monsoon Session.
"I am sure that MPs in both Houses, who have been fighting for centuries for social justice in the country, would understand the gravity of the above judgement and not allow (any business to be taken up) in the coming session," a party release here quoted Yadav as saying.
Yadav had last week written to MPs of all parties against "the anti-reservation mindset of the judiciary" while opposing the SC ruling that there can be no quota in appointments to faculty posts in speciality and super-speciality courses at medical colleges.
"With great pain and anguish, I am writing this to you with regard to the anti-reservation move in the country. I am shocked and sad to read the judgement of the Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court (Faculty Association of AIIMS vs. Union of India against the reservation policy for SC/ST/OBC)."
"The matter, which has huge national importance affecting 80 per cent of the population of this country, was heard and disposed of in such a manner... This judgement clearly brings forward the anti-reservation attitude and hidden motive to dilute the reservation policy by this government," he said in the letter.
Holding that the matter had wide implications, Yadav alleged that the case was fought with very little importance and utmost negligence by the government.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by former Chief Justice Altamas Kabir had pronounced its verdict on July 18 on the plea by the Faculty Association of AIIMS.
Yadav was critical of how Kabir gave the judgement a few days before he was retiring and added that the political parties were very much concerned that it had virtually become a practice by the judiciary to give such sensitive judgements in a hurry without hearing all parties properly.
"These anti-reservation judgements are often delivered during sensitive times," he said.