The Rajasthan High Court has issued notices to the State government and other authorities on a petition seeking a 9% sub-quota for the Bhil community within the existing 12% reservation for the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category.

The petitioners have also sought a stay on appointments being made under the ST category until the matter is decided.

A division bench comprising Justice Inderjeet Singh and Justice Sandeep Taneja issued notices to the Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary (Personnel), National Commission for Scheduled Tribes and the Central Government while hearing a petition filed by Shankar Lal Dahiya and others.

Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Manoj Chaudhary submitted that the petitioners are associated with the Adivasi Bhil Reservation Struggle Committee.

The petitioners have alleged that adequate data concerning the social, economic and educational backwardness of different communities within the ST category has not been collected while determining the distribution of reservation benefits.

They have claimed that the Meena community has received a substantial share of the benefits available under the ST quota, while the Bhil community has not received adequate representation.

The petitioners are therefore seeking sub-classification within the ST reservation, with 9 per cent of the existing 12 per cent ST quota to be earmarked for the Bhil community.

According to the petition, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes had written to the Rajasthan Chief Secretary on February 25 under Article 338A of the Constitution, calling for sub-classification within the ST category and implementation of the Supreme Court's judgment in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh.

The petitioners contend that despite the communication, no such sub-classification has been implemented in Rajasthan so far.

The plea further claims that there has been no comprehensive assessment of the Bhil community's representation in State government services or its educational and economic condition for a considerable period.

The petitioners have also raised issues concerning the community's socio-economic status and its access to government welfare schemes.

The division bench has sought responses from the concerned authorities on the issues raised in the petition.