The recent decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the 10% reservation for economically weaker sections (EWS) within the general category has sparked numerous legal and constitutional discussions. The ruling, delivered by a 3:2 majority, addressed several crucial issues, including the breach of the 50% reservation ceiling, the exclusion of SC/ST/OBCs from EWS provisions, and the reservation extended to private educational institutions.
All judges unanimously agreed that there is no constitutional barrier to implementing reservations based on economic criteria. They highlighted that such reservations serve as a means for affirmative action and do not infringe upon the core tenets of the Constitution.
The primary point of dissent revolved around the exclusion of socially disadvantaged groups (SC/ST/OBCs) from the EWS provisions. Justices Lalit and Bhat contended that this exclusion constituted discrimination, while the majority opinion maintained that it did not violate the Equality Code.
The Court ruled that Article 15(6), which allows for EWS reservation in private unaided educational institutions, is constitutionally valid. This ruling reaffirms the government’s capacity to extend reservations into the private sector.
Some dissenting judges, along with certain majority opinions, advocated for reforms within the reservation system. They underscored the necessity for a regular review and update of the criteria for identifying backwardness, suggesting that reservations for groups that have achieved socioeconomic progress might need to be reconsidered.
The Court reached a consensus that the 50% quota limit established by the Indira Sawhney judgment is not an absolute figure. It can be exceeded if Parliament determines it necessary for further affirmative action.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court's ruling regarding the EWS quota carries significant implications for India's reservation policies. While it reaffirms the constitutionality of economic criteria-based reservations, it also brings to light the ongoing need for reforms and considerations of inclusivity within the reservation framework.
The recent data from the Bihar caste-based survey, which indicates that Other Backward Classes and Extremely Backward Classes comprise a substantial 63% of the state’s population, strengthens the argument for expanded reservations. This information highlights that a considerable portion of the population is seeking social and economic upliftment through these policies.
In the Supreme Court's majority judgment regarding the EWS (Economically Weaker Sections) quota case, the 3:2 majority concluded that the EWS quota does not violate the 50% reservation ceiling that was established by the Indira Sawhney judgment in 1992. It emphasized that while the 50% ceiling is significant, it is not rigid and can be adjusted to facilitate further reservations through affirmative action, without compromising the fundamental structure of the Constitution.
Kutos : AI Assistant!
