EWS Reservation Case: The Supreme Court is going to give its decision on Monday (November 7) regarding the reservation given on economic basis. This reservation was given to the poor section of the general category in January 2019. There has been a demand to declare this 10 percent reservation given in government jobs and higher education as unconstitutional. A 5-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit heard the matter in detail for 7 days and reserved the verdict on September 27.
Apart from the Chief Justice, the remaining four members of the bench are Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and Jamshed B. Pardiwala. Before proceeding further, it is important to know that the system of reservation given on economic basis has been made by amending the constitution.
challenge to constitutional amendment
New provisions were added to Articles 15 and 16 through the 103rd Amendment of the Constitution. Articles 15 and 16 are those parts of the constitution that empower the government to make special arrangements to bring the weaker and disadvantaged sections at par with others.
In this, so far there was an emphasis on increasing the representation of the deprived class on the basis of social backwardness, but by adding a new sub-section 6 in both Articles 15 and 16, arrangements were made to promote the economically weaker sections in education and jobs. The validity of this article 15(6) and 16(6) has been challenged in the Supreme Court.
Reservation opponents’ argument
If you are not aware of this subject, then the first question that will arise in your mind is that what is wrong in giving reservation to the poor? After all, why more than 20 petitions were filed against it in the Supreme Court? First of all we understand this. For this we have to see the arguments given against the EWS reservation.
- The purpose of reservation is the upliftment of the class which has been facing social discrimination for centuries. Giving reservation on economic basis is against the basic spirit of the Constitution.
- If any section is financially weak, then it should be helped in another way.
- The basis of reservation going on till now was not caste. On the basis of backwardness and discrimination, Brahmins have also got reservation under SEBC category in some states, but the new 10 percent reservation makes caste discrimination. It says that only the general category will get reservation.
- If the government had to give reservation on the basis of poverty, then in this 10 percent reservation also, a system should have been made for SC, ST and OBC.
- The law of reservation has been made without collecting necessary data.
- The Supreme Court had given the decision to limit the reservation to 50 percent, through this provision it has also been violated.
What did the government say?
During the hearing, the then Attorney General KK Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on behalf of the Central Government defended this reservation. Let’s take a look at his main arguments.
- Article 38 and 46 of the Constitution states that it is the duty of the government to try to remove all kinds of inequality. Apart from scheduled castes and tribes, try to uplift other weaker sections as well.
- This system is necessary to provide equality status to the economically weaker sections.
- Keeping the limit of 50 percent of the total reservation is not a constitutional provision. Only the Supreme Court’s decision is there.
- There is 68 percent reservation in Tamil Nadu. This was approved by the High Court. Even the Supreme Court did not stay.
- Necessary amendments were made in Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution before making the law of reservation.
- No other class has been harmed by EWS reservation in higher education. 2 lakh 13 thousand 766 seats have been increased in colleges across the country. The central government has given Rs 4,315 crore to educational institutions to develop its infrastructure.
Supreme Court stays Uttarakhand High Court’s decision, 30% reservation for women in government jobs