[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has turned down a plea to review its November 2022 verdict by which it had upheld validity of the 103rd constitutional amendment to carve out 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections from unreserved class for admission in educational institutions and government jobs by holding that 50% cap on quota is not inviolable and affirmative action on economic basis may go a long way in eradicating caste-based reservation.
A five-judge bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala said there was no error in the judgement, which could be re-examined and dismissed a batch of review petitions filed by different parties, including the Tamil Nadu government.
“Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed,” the bench said. The order was passed on May 9 but was uploaded on Tuesday.
A five-judge bench of then Chief Justice U U Lalit and Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala approved the amendment by a majority 3:2 verdict, which would push the total reservation to 59.50% in central institutions.
While Justices Maheshwari, Trivedi and Pardiwala did not find any fault in the amendment saying that it was a right step towards an egalitarian society, then Chief Justice Lalit and Justice Bhat had said that not allowing the poor from SCs/STs/OBCs communities to get benefit of EWS quota and permitting only poor from forward class is discriminatory and “strikes a death knell to the equality and fraternal principle which permeates the equality code and non-discrimination principle”.
The judgement expanded the grounds for affirmative action beyond social and educational backwardness to include economic backwardness, while also clearing the way for more attempts by governments to provide more than 50% seats in government jobs and educational institutions on grounds of social and educational backwardness as well as economic deprivation.
The amendment had been challenged on the ground that the move to give reservation violated the “basic structure” of the Constitution.
“Reservation is an instrument of affirmative action by the State so as to ensure all-inclusive march towards the goals of an egalitarian society while counteracting inequalities; it is an instrument not only for inclusion of socially and educationally backward classes to the mainstream of society but, also for inclusion of any class or section so disadvantaged as to be answering the description of a weaker section. In this background, reservation structured singularly on economic criteria does not violate any essential feature of the Constitution of India and does not cause any damage to the basic structure of the Constitution,” Justice Maheshwari had said in his judgement.
A five-judge bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala said there was no error in the judgement, which could be re-examined and dismissed a batch of review petitions filed by different parties, including the Tamil Nadu government.
“Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed,” the bench said. The order was passed on May 9 but was uploaded on Tuesday.
A five-judge bench of then Chief Justice U U Lalit and Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala approved the amendment by a majority 3:2 verdict, which would push the total reservation to 59.50% in central institutions.
While Justices Maheshwari, Trivedi and Pardiwala did not find any fault in the amendment saying that it was a right step towards an egalitarian society, then Chief Justice Lalit and Justice Bhat had said that not allowing the poor from SCs/STs/OBCs communities to get benefit of EWS quota and permitting only poor from forward class is discriminatory and “strikes a death knell to the equality and fraternal principle which permeates the equality code and non-discrimination principle”.
The judgement expanded the grounds for affirmative action beyond social and educational backwardness to include economic backwardness, while also clearing the way for more attempts by governments to provide more than 50% seats in government jobs and educational institutions on grounds of social and educational backwardness as well as economic deprivation.
The amendment had been challenged on the ground that the move to give reservation violated the “basic structure” of the Constitution.
“Reservation is an instrument of affirmative action by the State so as to ensure all-inclusive march towards the goals of an egalitarian society while counteracting inequalities; it is an instrument not only for inclusion of socially and educationally backward classes to the mainstream of society but, also for inclusion of any class or section so disadvantaged as to be answering the description of a weaker section. In this background, reservation structured singularly on economic criteria does not violate any essential feature of the Constitution of India and does not cause any damage to the basic structure of the Constitution,” Justice Maheshwari had said in his judgement.
#Ews #rejects #review #verdict #upholding #EWS #quota #India #News
