Satya Prakas New Delhi, November 7 The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutional validity of the 10 per cent quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) in government jobs and educational institutions, saying it did not violate the basic structure of the Constitution. By a 3:2 majority, a five-judge bench — which had reserved its verdict on September 27 after hearing the petitioners, the Center and others — said the 103rd constitutional amendment providing for the EWS quota was valid. There were four separate judgments. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice JB Pardiwala – delivering separate verdicts – upheld the validity of the EWS Quota Act, while Justice S Ravindra Bhat delivered a dissenting verdict. CJI UU Lalit agreed with Justice Bhat. The minority verdict violated the 103rd Amendment and declared it unconstitutional to exclude SC/ST and other backward classes (OBC) from the ambit of EWS reservation. However, the majority said that the EWS Quota Act does not violate the equality code of the Constitution or the basic structure of the Constitution. On the issue of exceeding the 50 per cent ceiling, the majority said that it would not apply to EWS reservation. “The 103rd Constitutional Amendment cannot be said to violate the basic structure of the Constitution by allowing the State to make special provisions, including reservation, based on economic criteria,” Justice Maheshwari said. He said that the amendment cannot be held to violate the basic structure of the Constitution by allowing the State to make special provisions regarding admission to private unaided institutions or to exclude socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs)/OBCs/SCs/STs from the scope of the EWS quota. Justice Maheshwari said that the amendment did not cause any damage to the basic structure of the Constitution by violating the 50 per cent ceiling “because, the ceiling itself is not rigid and in any case applies only to the reservations provided in Articles 15 (4), 15(5) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India.” In her concurring verdict, Justice Trivedi said the EWS quota was based on “reasonable classification”. As this Court rules, just as equals cannot be treated unequally, so unequals cannot be treated equally,” he said. Justice Trivedi said the time has come to review the reservation/affirmative action system followed in India. “However, at the end of seventy-five years of our independence, we must review the reservation system in the larger interest of society as a whole, as a step forward towards transformative constitutionalism,” he said. Justice Pardiwala said the detention should not continue indefinitely. “Baba Saheb Ambedkar’s idea was to bring social harmony by introducing reservation only for ten years. However, it has continued for the last seven decades. Reservation should not continue indefinitely so that it becomes a vested interest,” he said. . Noting that the 103rd Amendment indicates Parliament’s intention to extend affirmative action to hitherto untouchable groups suffering from similar disadvantages as OBCs competing for opportunities, Justice Pardiwala said: “If economic progress can be accepted to undo certain social disadvantages for OBCs, the reverse would be just as important, at least for looking at the competitive disadvantages of EWS”. He welcomed the 103rd Amendment for offering “a basis unchallenged by Article 15(1) or Article 16(2) for providing general criteria of population and neutral criteria of caste/religion/community”, which are also in harmony with the ultimate constitutional objective of a casteless society. . Noting that the growth and spread of education had the effect of narrowing the gap between the different classes to a considerable extent, Justice Pardiwala said: “As larger proportions of backward class members attain acceptable standards of education and employment, they should be removed from the backward categories so that attention can be given to those classes that really need help.” The Center had defended the EWS quota law, arguing that it did not violate the basic structure of the Constitution and did not disturb the existing 50 per cent quota reserved for SCS, STs and OBCs. It was given for the first time without eroding the ‘fully independent’ reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs, as he had argued during the hearing. There are 40 petitions challenging the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2019, which introduced 10 percent EWS reservation in public employment and educational institutions over the existing 50 percent reservation to SCs, STs and other backward classes. #Supreme Court
