The Maharashtra government has officially withdrawn the 5% reservation for Muslims in educational institutions and government jobs, just days after the policy was notified earlier this month. The move has sparked political debate, legal scrutiny and reactions from leaders across the state.
The decision was formally published in the government gazette, and state officials said it was taken after considering constitutional provisions and recommendations from legal advisors. Below is a detailed overview of what has happened and what is likely to follow.
What Was the 5% Reservation Policy?
Earlier in February 2026, the Maharashtra government had approved a 5% reservation for the Muslim community under a category known as Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC), aimed at improving access to education and government employment for economically weaker Muslim families.
This move was part of a broader attempt by the state to address socio economic disparities and extend affirmative action beyond the existing reservation framework that applies to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes.
Why the Reservation Was Scrapped
According to government sources, the decision to rescind the reservation was taken after legal scrutiny suggested potential constitutional challenges, especially regarding:
- The maximum cap (50%) on reservations under Indian law, which this 5% quota might have breached
- Whether the Muslim community, as a whole, could be categorised as a backward class under existing legal frameworks
- Risk of pending or future litigation before the Supreme Court
Officials stated that the policy was withdrawn “in the larger interest of the state” to avoid prolonged legal battles that could disrupt the reservation system. Legal experts have indicated that this remains a complex constitutional issue involving equality and affirmative action norms.
Political Reactions and Debate
The announcement has triggered a range of political responses:
Political Leaders
- Opposition parties criticised the scrapping, calling it a politically motivated backtrack and urging the state government to reconsider its reservation stance.
- Some ruling party leaders, however, welcomed the move, emphasising the need to stay within constitutional limits and prioritise legal stability.
Community and Civil Society Responses
Several civil society groups and community representatives expressed disappointment, calling the reversal an undermining of social justice initiatives aimed at marginalised communities.
Conversely, critics argued that creating a religion based quota could set a precedent beyond constitutional provisions and entangle reservation policies in protracted court cases.
What Happens Next? Legal and Policy Uncertainty
The withdrawal of the 5% reservation does not entirely close the issue:
- Legal experts note that similar petitions have previously reached the Supreme Court, and any fresh effort to introduce such quotas would require clear empirical evidence of backwardness.
- Several community organisations are reportedly considering legal challenges or alternative policy measures to restore affirmative action benefits.
Amid this, the state’s reservation laws and implementation guidelines are likely to be revisited by policymakers and legal advisors.
Broader Context Reservation Debates in India
Reservation policy in India has long been a sensitive and contested area, balancing social equity, constitutional principles, and political priorities. Since the 1950s, the Indian reservation system has extended opportunities for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes, but religion based quotas remain a contentious topic in public discourse and legal forums.
The Maharashtra case highlights ongoing tensions between affirmative action goals and constitutional constraints, especially where new groups seek inclusion under reservation benefits.
