Supreme Court upholds 10% reservation under EWS quota
The Supreme Court upheld on Monday, the 103rd Constitution Amendment offering 10 % reservation to the economically weaker sections (EWS) from unreserved categories. Through this, beneficiaries can avail the quota for admission to central institutions and government jobs. A five-judge bench of Chief Justice UU Lalit and Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala stated that the provisions of the involved amendment is not the violation of the Constitution in a 3-2 verdict.
What is EWS quota?
The Central Government placed forth 10 % reservation quota for applicants in the economically weaker sections (EWS) sections of the society for admissions and government authorities jobs with the 103rd Constitution modification. The amendment was surpassed in January 2019 and via it Articles 15(6) and 16(6) have been inserted in the Constitution for the reservation.
The amendment empowers regional governments to offer reservations in university admissions and government jobs primarily based on criteria of financial backwardness.
Who can avail of EWS quota benefits?
According to the EWS quota, “General category individuals with annual gross family income of up to Rs 8,000 are eligible for the quota, excluding families owning more than 5 acres of agricultural land, a house exceeding 1,000 square feet, a land over 100 yards in a municipal notified area or land over 200 yards in a municipal unnotified area.
The Supreme Court dealt with up to 40 petitions against the EWS directive.
The question arises ” Why was EWS reservation challenged ” ?
Petitioners called the amendment “an attack on the constitutional vision of social justice” and “a constitutional fraud”. They argued that the policy would impede equality of opportunity and violate the basic structure of the Constitution by violating the 50 percent ceiling on the reserve established by the Supreme Court ruling in the Mandal Commission case.
Validity of the EWS quota?
During sentencing, the court considered three general questions to determine the validity of the EWS quota:
1. Whether Amendment 103 violates the basic structure of the Constitution and allows the state to make specific decommissioning provisions based on criteria.
2. When the EWS fee allegedly violates the basic structure by allowing the state to make special arrangements for admission to private establishments without subsidy.
3. Is Amendment 103 constitutional by excluding SC, ST and OBC from the scope of EWS? Reservation? A member of the panel of 5 judges, Judge Bhat, upheld the 103rd amendment for the first two questions but stated that the amendment for the third question should be discarded.
Chief Justice UU Lalit also expressed his disapproval of the verdict. The verdict was passed with a 3:2 majority and the EWS quota was confirmed.
