Skip to content
EQUALITY. MERIT. JUSTICE.NEWSLETTEREnglishहिंदीLOG IN
Reservation
Hatao Andolan
Live data & statistics

The numbers,
with sources.

Compiled from central and state notifications. Every figure on this page links to the document it came from — including the ones that complicate our own argument.

Central government quota
59.5%
Judicially settled ceiling
50%
States legislating above it
8+
Amendment — added 10% EWS
103rd
Central allocation

Central allocation

How the 59.5% at the central level is currently apportioned, with open merit as the remainder.

Source · DoPT consolidated instructions · Open the document →

State explorer

State explorer

Select a region to see its reported total. Several of these are under challenge — we say so rather than hiding it.

Total reserved

69%

Above the 50% ceiling

Protected under the Ninth Schedule; long-standing.

Source document →

Against the 50% ceiling

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT59.5%TAMIL NADU69%JHARKHAND77%CHHATTISGARH72%BIHAR65%RAJASTHAN64%MADHYA PRADESH63%HARYANA60%GUJARAT59%

Red = above the 50% ceilingFigures as notified by each government; several are sub judice

View as a table
Total reservation percentage by region with sources
RegionTotalAs ofSource
Central Government59.5%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0354
Tamil Nadu69%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Jharkhand77%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Chhattisgarh72%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Bihar65%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Rajasthan64%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Madhya Pradesh63%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Haryana60%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Gujarat59%2026-07-01RHA-2025-0367
Since 1950

Since 1950

How the central ceiling has moved. Each step is a document in the repository.

  1. 22.5%

    1950

    SC and ST provisions

    Source →

  2. 49.5%

    1990

    Mandal: OBC added

    Source →

  3. 50%

    1992

    Ceiling settled by the Court

    Source →

  4. 59.5%

    2019

    103rd Amendment adds EWS

    Source →

  5. 77%

    2026

    Highest state figure notified

    Source →

Methodology

How this page is compiled

Figures are transcribed from the notification or judgment that created them, never from secondary reporting. Where a state figure is contested in court, we mark it and link the pleading.

Percentages are of advertised posts or seats, not of population. Comparing the two is the single most common misreading of this data.

What we still cannot show you

The gaps in the record

  • Sub-category-wise outcomes over time, for most departments.
  • Consistent creamy-layer exclusion figures across states.
  • Backlog vacancy data published on a comparable basis.
Help us file the RTIs →

Download

Take the dataset

Everything on this page as CSV, with a source column pointing at the document ID in the repository.