With reference to the reservation law struck down by the Karnataka High Court, consider the following statements: 1. The court ruled that the Constitution mandates 'proportionate representation' for SC and ST groups 2. The law sought to increase the ST reservation from 3% to 7% 3. The law sought to increase the SC reservation from 15% to 17% Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Karnataka High Court strikes down law increasing SC and ST reservation percentages

GS2Polity · Governance · IR· Vulnerable sections (SC/ST, minorities, disabled, elderly, children)· Prelims + Mains· 12 October 2026

Constitutional mandate of 'adequate' vs 'proportionate' representation: a key GS2 Social Justice and Polity concept.

Why in news

The Karnataka High Court struck down a state law increasing SC and ST reservation percentages, ruling that the Constitution mandates 'adequate representation' rather than 'proportionate representation.'

Background

Hemalekha, invalidated the law. The law sought to increase SC reservation from 15% to 17% and ST reservation from 3% to 7%.

Facts for Prelims

PlaceKarnataka High Court: Judicial body in the state of Karnataka
FactProposed SC reservation increase: 15% to 17%
FactProposed ST reservation increase: 3% to 7%
ConstitutionAdequate representation: Constitutional mandate for SC/ST groups

Prelims practice question

With reference to the reservation law struck down by the Karnataka High Court, consider the following statements:

The court ruled that the Constitution mandates 'proportionate representation' for SC and ST groups
The law sought to increase the ST reservation from 3% to 7%
The law sought to increase the SC reservation from 15% to 17%

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a)1 only
(b)3 only
(c)1 and 3 only
(d)2 and 3 only

Show answer

Answer: (d) 2 and 3 only — Statements 2 and 3 are correct. Statement 1 is incorrect: The court ruled that the Constitution mandates 'adequate representation' rather than 'proportionate representation'.

For Mains

Q. Discuss the constitutional distinction between 'adequate' and 'proportionate' representation in the context of reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Dimensions to cover in your answer

Judicial interpretation: Conflict between population-based claims and constitutional mandates for adequate representation
Federal friction: State legislative autonomy in social justice policy vs. High Court oversight

Keywords: Adequate representation · Proportionate representation · Judicial review · Reservation policy · Constitutional mandate

Read the full news →Report a mistake in this note Source: The Hindu ↗Also: GS2 · Constitution, amendments & basic structure Also: GS2 · Bills, Acts & ordinances

More Social Justice notes

Centre proposes 30% trade-margin cap on cancer drugs to save ₹2,500 crore annually · 12 October 2026
Justice Nagarathna notes 55% of juvenile cases pending across 18 States and 2 UTs · 12 October 2026
Keralam provides work to 9.32 lakh families under Viksit Bharat Rozgar Act · 12 October 2026
CoverSure CEO warns policyholders to check OPD limits for mental illness coverage · 12 October 2026
CM C. Joseph Vijay expands VPT to offer no-fare bus travel for women · 11 October 2026
3 of 19 West Bengal appellate tribunals vacant amid 37 lakh voters in limbo · 11 October 2026

All Social Justice current affairs →

Something wrong, or something missing?

Spotted a mistake in a note, or want a topic, format or PDF that would help your preparation? Write to us. We read every mail and fix errors fast.

Report a mistake →Ask for something →[email protected]

This note is generated automatically from SatyaDheesh's news feed and mapped to the UPSC CSE syllabus. Check facts against the original report or PIB before using them in an answer.