The Mamata Banerjee-led West Bengal government, the Calcutta High Court has stayed the implementation of the state’s controversial new Other Backward Classes (OBC) list, which prominently features 80 Muslim groups out of 140 notified communities. The interim order, passed on June 18, 2025, by a Division Bench of Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Rajasekhar Mantha, exposes what appears to be a thinly veiled attempt by the state to reintroduce religion-based reservation—despite an earlier judicial invalidation of similar actions.
The High Court minced no words in rebuking the state’s move, observing that the government was proceeding in “hot haste” to reintroduce the “self-same classes” whose inclusion had been struck down earlier. The justices clearly stated that the executive notifications issued in May and June 2025 were in “direct conflict” with the court’s previous rulings and had not been issued under the authority of the West Bengal Backward Classes (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 2012.
“The respondents are attempting to bring in the self-same classes and to re-introduce the percentage of reservation, which have been struck down by this Court… by executive orders and not in exercise of State’s legislative functions,” the court stated, terming the state’s actions a blatant bypass of constitutional and judicial protocols.
The interim stay, which halts all steps related to the newly notified list until July 31, 2025, or until further orders, includes a freeze on the state’s proposed portal for submission of new caste certificate applications.
This judicial pushback comes after the Mamata government had tabled a revised list of OBC-A and OBC-B groups in the Assembly on June 10, adding 76 new groups, bringing the total to 140, 80 of which are Muslims. This follows the earlier controversy surrounding the now-defunct OBC list which contained 113 sub-groups, 77 of them Muslim, and was struck down by the same court in May 2024 for being in violation of the constitutional bar on religion-based reservations.
While the state’s challenge to that decision is pending in the Supreme Court, the apex court had already questioned the legitimacy of reservations granted purely on religious lines and reminded the state of the constitutional framework, which demands caste and social backwardness—not religious identity—as the basis for reservation.
“Reservation cannot be granted on the basis of religion,” the Supreme Court had reminded the West Bengal government earlier, sharply questioning the manner in which communities were being classified.
The move has triggered a fresh round of political confrontation. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has slammed the Trinamool Congress (TMC) for what it terms “blatant minority appeasement” at the cost of genuine backward communities, accusing the government of communalising social justice.
“This is nothing short of institutionalised vote-bank politics. The TMC is misusing constitutional provisions to gift quotas to a specific religious group,” said a senior BJP leader in West Bengal.
On the other hand, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has defended the list, claiming it is based solely on backwardness as identified by a fresh commission. She has accused the BJP and the judiciary of targeting the poor Muslim communities of the state and playing divisive politics.
However, the court’s latest remarks appear to affirm the opposition’s criticism. The Bench underlined that the proper procedure would have been to place reports before the legislature for a legislative amendment—rather than enforcing such sweeping changes through executive notifications.
The High Court’s stinging indictment holds the government accountable for bypassing legislative scrutiny and acting in violation of the principles of constitutional governance. “The executive notifications are in direct conflict with the judgment… and not issued under the 2012 Act,” the court categorically ruled.
