The Supreme Court, in its judgment on April 8, 2009, ruled that the government has no constitutional obligation to provide reservation to Scheduled Castes and Tribes in the preliminary examination to fill officer level posts. The Supreme Court separated the recruitment process from charitable work and said that recruitment to posts should be done on the basis of merit and skill.
So that service to the country can be done in the true sense. This decision was taken by the Supreme Court after refusing to give reservation at the preliminary examination level in the appointment of posts in the examination conducted by Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, against which the candidates of the reserved quota of the examination had filed a petition in the court.
Ninth Schedule also under judicial review: Supreme Court
On January 11, 2007, the Supreme Court constituted a bench of nine judges, including the then Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice Ashok Bhan, Arijit Pasayat, B.P. Singh, S.H. Kapadia, C.K. Thakkar, P.K. Balasubramaniam, Altamas Kabir and D.K. Jain, said that no law can escape judicial review merely by being included in the Ninth Schedule That means the Ninth Schedule can also be judicially reviewed. This bench said that such laws which were included in the Ninth Schedule on and after April 24, 1973, are subject to judicial review on the basis of their relevance to the basic structure of the Constitution and the fundamental rights given in Articles 14, 19, 20 and 21. can be done.The date of April 24, 1973 was chosen because on this day a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot change the basic structure of the Constitution. Can't do it.
From this time onwards, the basic structure of the Constitution (which is unchanged) became the scope for amending the Constitution.