Author: Pari Chauhan, Student at Symbiosis Law School, Noida
Co-Author: Dedipya Tawri, Student at Symbiosis Law School, Noida
ABSTRACT
On 7 November 2022, a 2-3 ratio verdict was delivered by the Supreme Court validating the 10 % quota reservation in the government jobs and educational institutions for the economically weaker sections of the general category of population. Reservation has been used as a tool or means to compensate for the past injustice, better representation and overall upliftment for the weaker, backward sections of the society specifically targeted towards SC, ST and OBC groups. It was not meant as a tool for economic upliftment solely. “It is only when distributive justice or utilitarian principle and not the compensatory justice becomes the basis of protective discrimination, that poverty and alienation may become important factors in determining backwardness”. The recent EWS judgment is violative on many grounds which further defeats the purpose of which reservation was introduced in the first place.
This paper will criticize the amendment as it is violative of the basic structure of the constitution as economic criteria cannot be sole basis of reservation and it also violates the equality principle enshrined in our Constitution. Further this paper has also strived to explain, criticize the need for reservation in today’s changing society with reference to castes and if economic based reservation is really plausible? It is seen that the poverty alleviation mechanism is not a possible or probable ground for providing sole reservations to one quota and disregarding the other quotas who have the majority of financial requirements and issues. Further this is an issue that can be solved through various other well aimed policies without disrupting the basic structure, or trying to converting an exception of reservation into a rule or disregarding the requirements or pleas of the other weaker sections like SC, ST, and OBC.
