Horizontal reservation

Topic: Safeguards for Vulnerable Sections: SCs, STs, OBCs, Minorities, Women and Children · NCERT: Beyond NCERT

Meaning

Horizontal reservation is a quota for groups such as women, persons with disabilities (4%) and ex-servicemen. It cuts across the vertical blocks (SC, ST, OBC, EWS and open), and it is filled inside each block, not added as extra seats on top.

It matters because it helps groups that face disadvantage in every caste group, such as women or disabled people, without raising the total share of reserved seats. Courts have also shaped how it is filled, from Anil Kumar Gupta (1995) to Saurav Yadav (2020).

Explanation

Vertical and horizontal: the two layers of quotas

• Vertical reservation: each social group gets its own separate block of seats or posts.
• Central quotas: SC 15%, ST 7.5%, OBC 27%, EWS 10%.

• These blocks sit side by side, like columns.

• Horizontal reservation: a quota that runs across all these columns, like a row.

• It covers women, persons with disabilities (4%) and ex-servicemen.
• A candidate in it belongs to two groups at once, for example an "SC woman" or an "OBC ex-serviceman".

How it is filled: inside, not on top

• The core rule: horizontal seats are adjusted within the vertical blocks.
• An SC woman selected for a women's seat fills an SC seat as well.

• A general-category disabled person fills an open seat as well.

• Simple example: if 100 posts are advertised, 4 go to persons with disabilities.

• These 4 are not posts 101 to 104.

• They are spread across the SC, ST, OBC, EWS and open blocks.

• Result: the total share of reserved seats does not rise because of horizontal quotas.

Two methods of counting (Anil Kumar Gupta, 1995)

• Compartmentalised: the horizontal quota is split inside each vertical block. For example, a set share of women within the SC block, within the OBC block, and so on.
• Overall: the horizontal quota is counted across the whole intake, not block by block.
• In both methods, the seats are still adjusted inside the vertical blocks.

Limits: merit first, quota second

• Merit comes first. A reserved-category woman who is selected on her own merit in the open list still counts towards the women's quota (Rajesh Kumar Daria, 2007). The quota is not added on top.
• Quotas are not rigid "slots". A reserved-category candidate who earns an open-category horizontal seat on merit must get it (Saurav Yadav, 2020) [4].
• So an OBC woman who scores more than the last general-category woman cannot be pushed back into the OBC-women seats only.

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it comes from:
• The vertical blocks it works inside rest on Art. 15(4), 16(4) (SC, ST, OBC) and Art. 15(6), 16(6) (EWS, 103rd Amendment, 2019) [1].
• Art. 15(3) lets the state make special provisions for women and children.

• The rules for filling horizontal seats have been set mostly by Supreme Court judgments.

• The idea behind it: substantive equality (equal real chances, not just the same rules for all).

• N.M. Thomas (1976), Indra Sawhney (1992) and B.K. Pavitra II (2019) treat reservation as a facet (one part) of equality, not an exception to it [3].

• Horizontal quotas apply this to disadvantages that cut across caste, such as gender and disability.

• Landmark cases:

• Anil Kumar Gupta (1995): horizontal quotas may be compartmentalised or overall. Either way they are adjusted inside the vertical blocks.
• Rajesh Kumar Daria (2007): a reserved-category woman selected on merit in the open list also counts towards the women's quota. The horizontal quota is not added on top.
• Saurav Yadav v. State of U.P. (18 December 2020; Justices U.U. Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat):
  • Facts: in the 2013 recruitment of U.P. police constables, OBC-female and SC-female candidates scored more than the last woman selected in the general category, but were kept out of the open seats [4].
  • Held: vertical and horizontal quotas are tools for representation, not rigid "slots". All such OBC women who scored above the last general-category woman had to be appointed [4].

Don't confuse with

• Vertical reservation: gives each social group (SC, ST, OBC, EWS) its own separate block. Horizontal reservation creates no new block. It is filled inside the existing ones.
• EWS quota (103rd Amendment, 2019): this is a vertical block of up to 10%, added in addition to existing quotas [2]. It is not a horizontal quota, even though it is also new and cuts across caste lines.
• Carry-forward of unfilled posts (Art. 16(4B), 81st Amendment, 2000): unfilled reserved posts are carried into later years as a separate group, outside that year's 50% limit. This has nothing to do with filling horizontal quotas within blocks.

Prelims Hooks

• Reservation for women, persons with disabilities (4%) and ex-servicemen is horizontal. SC, ST, OBC and EWS quotas are vertical.
• Horizontal quotas are adjusted within the vertical blocks. They are not added on top, so they do not raise the total share of reserved seats.
• Anil Kumar Gupta (1995): horizontal quotas can be compartmentalised (within each block) or overall (across the whole intake).
• Rajesh Kumar Daria (2007): a reserved-category woman selected on merit in the open list still counts towards the women's quota.
• Saurav Yadav (2020): a reserved-category candidate who earns an open-category horizontal seat on merit must get it. Quotas are not rigid "slots" [4].
• Trap: the EWS quota (Arts. 15(6), 16(6)) is vertical, not horizontal [1].

Mains Points

• Fixing cross-cutting disadvantage without breaching the ceiling:
• Gender, disability and military service bring disadvantage in every caste group.

• Horizontal quotas address this inside the existing blocks, so they help without raising total reservation. This matters given Indra Sawhney's 50% ceiling [3].

• Merit versus "slots": the fairness question:

• Before Saurav Yadav (2020), some recruiters kept high-scoring SC and OBC women out of open seats. This effectively capped reserved candidates at their own quota [4].

• The Court held that the open category is open to all on merit. This supports the substantive equality reading of N.M. Thomas, Indra Sawhney and B.K. Pavitra II [3].

• Implementation gaps:

• The choice between compartmentalised and overall methods (Anil Kumar Gupta, 1995), and the order in which merit and quota seats are filled, can change who gets selected.
• Clear, uniform recruitment rules and transparent merit lists would cut down on court cases and make sure the benefit reaches the groups it is meant for.

Related concepts

• Substantive equality
• Reservation policy
• Reservation in public employment
• N.M. Thomas case
• Vertical reservation

Read more

• Why safeguards: substantive equality and the constitutional toolkit