On Thursday, the Supreme Court questioned the Karnataka government’s rationale for cancelling the state’s 4% Muslim reservation.

A bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna observed that the government relied on the interim report rather than the final report to decide.

Judge Joseph commented: “This government order is based on entirely false assumptions, and based on prima facie evidence, the passed order appears to show that your decision-making is not on solid grounds.”

The court is also seeking an answer from the Karnataka government in a new petition attacking the move.

Appropriately, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the Karnataka government, assured the court that no appointment or recognition would be made under the relevant government order until the next hearing on Tuesday. The Supreme Court will guarantee the record.

The matter concerns the recent decision of the BJP-led Karnataka state government to abolish the 4% quota for Muslims under the Other Backward Class (OBC) category.

Under the government order, communities can book under the 10% Economically Weakened Areas (EWS) category.

This 4% quota will now be divided equally between Veerashaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas.

Senior Advocate Dushayant Dave appeared on behalf of the petitioner, seeking a stay of the government’s decision. He noted that the move was made two days before state legislative assembly elections were announced.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioner in a flagged issue, argued that removing the quota violated Section 14 of the Constitution.

Senior advocate Professor Ravivarma Kumar said the Muslim community was singled out for their religion. He added that the urgency to remove reservations comes when institutions in the state are enrolling.

SG Mehta claimed that the petitioners had made false statements and the judge should not have formed a preliminary view of the stay in their favour.

He bought time to submit a response before any stay, noting that no appointments or recognitions had been made under the move.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared on behalf of the intervenor-Vokkaliga group and asked the court to wait until Tuesday.