The 105th Amendment of the Indian Constitution marks a critical turning point in India’s commitment to social justice and federalism. Enacted in 2021,

105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021

The 105th Amendment of the Indian Constitution marks a critical turning point in India’s commitment to social justice and federalism. Enacted in 2021, this Constitutional amendment restores the power of state governments to independently identify and manage Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for reservations in state-specific jobs and educational institutions. 

It was introduced in response to a Supreme Court ruling that limited states' authority over OBC classification, creating a central control over the reservation lists. By amending Articles 338B, 342A, and 366, the 105th Amendment reaffirms the importance of local governance, allowing states to address their unique social and economic challenges more effectively.

This legislative change is vital because it strengthens the federal structure, empowering states to recognize disadvantaged communities that may not be adequately represented in the central OBC list. 

The 105th Amendment ultimately highlights India's commitment to social equity and inclusive development, ensuring representation for diverse communities across the nation.

---

Introduction

The 105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021 is one of the most impactful amendments passed in recent years because it deals with the sensitive, complex, and socially significant issue of reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs). 

While many amendments focus on structural governance, taxes, or linguistic identity, the 105th Amendment speaks directly to India’s long-standing struggle for social justice. It restores the power of State Governments to identify their own OBCs, also known as State OBC lists, and makes it clear that both the Centre and the States have separate and independent authority over OBC classification.

This amendment became necessary because of a Supreme Court judgment related to the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, which unintentionally created confusion about whether States still had the power to maintain OBC lists. 

Overnight, a simple interpretation threatened to shift a major constitutional responsibility away from the States and centralize it entirely within the Union Government. This was never the original intent, and it created immense concern among State Governments and communities who feared losing representation and reservation benefits.

The 105th Amendment thus acted like a constitutional correction. It reaffirmed what had always been understood since independence — that States have the power to identify socially and educationally backward communities within their boundaries. 

Without this amendment, many States would have faced legal barriers in maintaining their reservation systems. The amendment therefore preserves federal balance, protects social justice mechanisms, and settles the legal confusion created by the earlier amendment.

---

Background: How the 102nd Amendment Triggered Confusion Leading to the 105th Amendment

To understand why the 105th Amendment was passed, one must look at what happened after the 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018.

The 102nd Amendment created:

The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) as a constitutional body
A definition of “Socially and Educationally Backward Classes” (SEBCs) in Article 342A
A process for the President to notify lists of SEBCs for the whole country

While its goal was to strengthen OBC representation, one part of it — Article 342A — created confusion. Article 342A said that the President would notify the list of SEBCs for the purposes of the Central Government. It also said that only Parliament could change this list.

This raised a question:

Did States lose their separate powers to create their own OBC lists?

For decades, both Centre and States kept their own lists.
But after 102nd Amendment, the Supreme Court interpreted Article 342A differently.

---

The Supreme Court Judgment That Made the 105th Amendment Necessary

In May 2021, during the Maratha Reservation case, the Supreme Court ruled that:

Only the President can identify OBCs, and States cannot maintain their own independent OBC lists.

This interpretation shocked State Governments because it meant:

State OBC lists would be replaced
States would lose power over reservation for their own populations
Almost 671 communities across India would lose reservation until Parliament updated their status

Social justice policies in Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and many other states would be affected.

The ruling created panic because States understood their own populations better than the Centre. Each region has unique castes, communities, and local backward groups.

Suddenly, a simple interpretation created a constitutional crisis.

Immediately, there was widespread demand for clarifying the law.

The Government of India introduced the 105th Amendment to restore States’ powers.

---

What the 105th Amendment Was Designed to Do

The amendment had one clear goal:

To restore States’ authority to identify and list OBCs.

It clarified four essential points:

1. The State Government has the power to identify “Socially and Educationally Backward Classes” for State purposes.

2. The Central OBC list and State OBC list are separate and independent.

3. Parliament can modify the Central list, but States can modify the State list.

4. Article 342A applies only to the Central list, not to State lists.

Thus, the amendment simply restored the federal balance that existed before the confusion began.

---

What the 105th Amendment Actually Changes in the Constitution

The 105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021 was passed to restore the power of States and Union Territories to identify Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for their own purposes. 

This amendment came after the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Maratha Reservation case (Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. State of Maharashtra, 2021), which held that after the 102nd Amendment, only the Central Government had the power to identify OBCs.

To remove this confusion and protect the federal structure, Parliament enacted the 105th Amendment.

1. Restores Power of States to Identify OBCs

The biggest change made by the 105th Amendment is that it clearly restores the power of States and Union Territories to:

• Identify socially and educationally backward classes (OBCs)

• Prepare and maintain their own State OBC lists

• Grant reservations in State services and institutions

This power is independent of the Central OBC list.

---

2. Clarifies Articles 338B and 342A

The amendment clarified that:

• Article 342A applies only to the Central List of OBCs

• The President’s notification under Article 342A is only for the Central Government’s purposes

• States are not bound by the Central OBC list for their own reservations

This removed the ambiguity created after the 102nd Amendment.

---

3. Protects Federal Structure

The amendment strengthens cooperative federalism by:

• Respecting States’ autonomy

• Preventing over-centralization

• Ensuring balance between Centre and States

It recognizes that social backwardness is a local issue, not a uniform national concept.

---

4. No Change to SC/ST Identification

The 105th Amendment:

• Applies only to OBCs

• Does not affect Articles 341 and 342, which deal with SCs and STs

• SC/ST identification still remains exclusively with the President and Parliament

The 105th Constitutional Amendment is essentially a clarificatory and corrective amendment. It does not create new rights but restores the traditional powers of States to identify OBCs for their own reservations. By doing so, it safeguards the federal balance of the Constitution and ensures that social justice policies remain effective and locally relevant.

In simple words, The Centre controls the Central OBC list, and States control their own OBC lists.

Key Events Which Led to the 105th Amendment of the Indian Constitution

The 105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021 did not come suddenly. It was the result of a series of constitutional developments, judicial interpretations, and political concerns related to OBC reservation and federalism. Below are the key events explained in a clear, step-by-step manner.

1. Reservation Policy and Role of States (Before 2018)

Before 2018, the States had the power to identify Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for the purpose of reservation in State services and educational institutions. Each State prepared its own OBC list based on local social and educational backwardness.

At the same time, the Central Government maintained a separate Central OBC list for Central services and institutions. This system worked smoothly and respected India’s federal structure.

---

2. 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018

In 2018, Parliament passed the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, which:

• Gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC)

• Inserted Article 338B (NCBC)

• Inserted Article 342A, giving the President power to notify OBCs

The intention was to strengthen OBC welfare at the Central level, but the wording of Article 342A created constitutional ambiguity.

---

3. Ambiguity Created by Article 342A

Article 342A stated that:

The President shall specify socially and educationally backward classes for the purposes of the Constitution.

This raised an important question:
Did this take away the States’ power to identify OBCs?

Initially, Parliament intended Article 342A to apply only to the Central OBC list, but this was not clearly mentioned in the Constitution.

---

4. Maratha Reservation Law by Maharashtra (2018)

In 2018, the Maharashtra Government passed a law granting reservation to the Maratha community by declaring them as a socially and educationally backward class.

This law was challenged in court and ultimately reached the Supreme Court.

---

5. Supreme Court Judgment in Maratha Reservation Case (2021)

In Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. State of Maharashtra (2021), the Supreme Court held that:

• After the 102nd Amendment, States no longer have the power to identify OBCs
• Only the President and Parliament can identify OBCs
• States cannot independently create or modify OBC lists

This judgment had serious consequences:

• Many State OBC lists became constitutionally doubtful

• State reservation policies were disrupted

• Federal balance was weakened

---

6. Strong Reaction from States and Political Parties

After the judgment:

• Several States protested, saying their constitutional powers were taken away

• Political parties across ideologies opposed over-centralization

• OBC communities feared loss of reservation benefits

There was a strong demand to restore States’ powers.

---

7. Government Acknowledges the Problem

The Central Government accepted that:

• Parliament never intended to take away States’ powers

• The Supreme Court’s interpretation was based on constitutional wording

• A constitutional amendment was necessary to clarify the position

---

8. Introduction of the 105th Constitutional Amendment Bill (2021)

To correct the situation, the government introduced the 105th Constitutional Amendment Bill, which:

• Clarified that Article 342A applies only to the Central OBC list

• Explicitly restored States’ power to identify OBCs for State purposes

• Protected federalism and reservation policies

---

9. Unanimous Passage of the Amendment

The Bill was passed:

• Unanimously in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha

• With support from all major political parties

This reflected a national consensus on protecting State autonomy and social justice.

The 105th Amendment was passed to undo the unintended effects of the 102nd Amendment and restore States’ rightful powers over OBC identification.

Provisions of the Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021

The Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021 was enacted to restore and clearly define the powers of the State Governments in identifying Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs). This amendment became necessary after the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Maratha reservation case (2021), which interpreted the 102nd Constitutional Amendment to mean that only the Central Government had the power to identify SEBCs. 

This interpretation created confusion and limited the ability of States to implement reservation policies based on their local social conditions. To correct this situation and protect the federal structure of the Constitution, the 105th Amendment was passed.

The most important provision of this amendment is that it restores the authority of States and Union Territories to identify SEBCs for their own purposes. States can now independently prepare and maintain their own lists of socially and educationally backward classes for reservation in State government jobs and State educational institutions. This ensures that State Governments can continue to address regional and community-specific backwardness effectively.

Key provisions of the Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021 include:

• Restoration of the power of States and Union Territories to identify SEBCs for State-level reservations.

• Creation of a clear distinction between the Central List and State Lists of SEBCs.

• Confirmation that the Central List will apply only to Central Government services and Central educational institutions.

• Assurance that State SEBC lists will apply only within the respective States.

To legally implement these changes, the amendment modified important constitutional provisions. Article 342A was amended to clearly state that while the President will notify the Central List of SEBCs, the States have independent power to identify backward classes for State purposes. Articles 338B and 366(26C) were also clarified to remove ambiguity and support the authority of the States.

Another significant feature of the amendment is the protection of existing reservation benefits. The Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021 ensures that all reservations already granted by States to backward classes remain valid and unaffected. This provision safeguards the interests of beneficiaries and avoids disruption in education and employment opportunities.

The main objectives of this amendment can be summarised as follows:

• To undo the impact of the Supreme Court’s interpretation in the Maratha reservation case.

• To strengthen the principle of cooperative federalism.

• To ensure smooth and effective implementation of reservation policies.

• To protect social justice and equality for backward classes across India.

The Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021 plays a vital role in maintaining the federal balance of the Indian Constitution. By restoring the powers of States and clearly defining the roles of the Centre and the States, the amendment removes legal uncertainty and reinforces the commitment of the Constitution towards social justice, equality, and inclusive development.

---

Conclusion

The 105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021 is more than a legal correction — it is a reaffirmation of India’s commitment to social justice, federalism, and constitutional clarity. By restoring States’ authority to identify OBCs, it ensures that millions of people continue receiving the benefits they rely on. It strengthens federal harmony, protects diversity, and stabilizes reservation policy.

The amendment proves that when confusion arises, India’s democratic institutions — Parliament, States, and society — can come together to protect fairness and equality. It ensures that the story of social justice, written over decades, continues without interruption.