More than a decade after Maharashtra briefly introduced a 5% reservation for certain Muslim communities, the BJP-led state government has formally withdrawn the last remaining administrative framework connected to that policy, effectively closing a long-dormant legal and political chapter. The decision has triggered sharp political reactions, with the Congress calling the move “anti-Muslim,” while the ruling alliance argues that the quota had already ceased to exist in practice years ago and that the current step merely removes an outdated framework that no longer had legal effect.
The 5% quota originated in 2014, when the then Congress-NCP government issued an ordinance granting reservations in education to 50 specified Muslim sub-castes classified under a newly created “Special Backward Category A.” Importantly, the policy was never meant for the entire Muslim population of Maharashtra; it applied only to communities identified as socially and educationally backward. The government justified the move using findings from the 2006 Sachar Committee report and a 2008 Maharashtra study led by civil servant Mehmood-ur-Rehman, both of which highlighted poor educational outcomes and under-representation of Muslims in public services.
The ordinance immediately became controversial because it pushed total reservations in the state beyond the 50% ceiling established by the Supreme Court’s 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment. Combined with a simultaneous 16% Maratha quota, total reservations rose to about 68%, prompting legal challenges before the Bombay High Court. Petitioners argued that the quota violated constitutional equality principles and amounted to religion-based reservation.
In its interim order in November 2014, the Bombay High Court examined the Muslim and Maratha quotas separately. The court held that there was sufficient prima facie data to classify the 50 identified Muslim communities as socially and educationally backward, relying on multiple reports documenting educational deprivation and high dropout rates. It clarified that the quota was not religion-based because it applied only to specific backward groups within the Muslim community rather than to Muslims as a whole. The court therefore allowed the 5% reservation to operate temporarily for admissions in state-run and aided educational institutions, citing extraordinary circumstances that justified exceeding the 50% ceiling at the interim stage.
However, the policy never became permanent law. Because the ordinance was not converted into legislation after the change of government later in 2014, it lapsed automatically within months. Subsequent administrations, including governments in which Congress itself was a coalition partner, did not revive or legislate the quota. Over time, the government resolutions linked to the ordinance lost practical effect, meaning the reservation stopped functioning long ago.
The recent decision by the Maharashtra government therefore does not remove an active quota but formally withdraws the remaining administrative traces of the 2014 framework. In practical terms, there is no immediate impact on educational admissions or employment opportunities, since the reservation had not been operational for years. Legally, however, the move eliminates any residual executive basis that could have been used to revive the earlier model without fresh legislation.
The political disagreement stems largely from interpretation rather than immediate policy change. Opposition parties argue that formally scrapping the framework sends a negative political message to minority communities, while the government maintains that the quota was never implemented and existed only as an election-time measure by the previous administration. What the decision ultimately changes is the legal landscape: any future attempt to introduce reservations for Muslim communities in Maharashtra would now require a completely new law backed by fresh data and constitutional scrutiny, rather than reliance on the 2014 ordinance.
