Former Supreme Court judge, Justice Rohinton Nariman, has expressed strong disapproval of the court’s decision to uphold the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation. He stated that the judgment effectively turns the Constitution “on its head,” raising questions about the decision’s alignment with constitutional principles.
Background:
The EWS reservation, introduced through the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, provides a 10% quota in education and government jobs for economically weaker sections, excluding those from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes. The amendment has faced criticism for allegedly breaching the 50% cap on reservations and excluding disadvantaged communities based on caste.
Court’s Rationale:
Justice Nariman criticized the ruling for deviating from the core principles of equality enshrined in the Constitution. He argued that the exclusion of historically marginalized groups from EWS benefits undermines the objective of achieving social justice and violates the basic structure doctrine.
Existing Measures:
The reservation system in India is designed to address historical injustices faced by certain communities. However, the EWS reservation, as a separate category, has sparked debates about balancing economic criteria with caste-based affirmative action.
Conclusion:
Justice Nariman’s remarks highlight ongoing concerns about the constitutional validity of the EWS reservation. The debate underscores the need for judicial decisions to align with the principles of social justice while addressing the complexities of economic and caste-based disparities.