EWS Quota reservation in NEET and JEE will remain or not

      In 2019 ,Government introduced 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) in All India Quota Scheme for undergraduate medical and dental courses from 2021-22 onwards.There is a reservation of 10% in EWS Quota scheme for General quota candidates in engineering institutes like IITs and NITs also.This reservation is a great benefit for the students of General Category economically weaker candidates seeking admission through NEET and JEE exams in India.This reservation was provided through 103^rd Constitutional Amendment . Now this  10% EWS reservation in NEET (UG) or JEE has become a big confusion as Supreme Court is examining the validity of this amendment . If Supreme Court given it’s decision against the reservation, there will be a big confusion in rank list and allotment of colleges.

                           Supreme Court is examining the 103^rd Constitutional Amendment for 10 % reservation to economically weaker section in Admissions and Government Jobs. It will see that this amendment violates the basic structures of constitution or not. To examine the 103^rd Amendment 5 Judge commission Bench has been formed headed by chief Justice of India U. U. Lalit . Other Judges in Bench are Justice S Ravindra Bhat, Dinesh Maheshwar, S.B. Pardiwala and Bela Trivedi. Bench will examine 3 key issues which is said to violate basic structure of India Constitution.

Key issues which Supreme Court will examine are:-

1. By 103^rd Amendment, State can make special provisions based on economic criteria.
2. State can make special provisions in relation to admission in private unaided institutions.
3. Excluding Socially and Educationally Backward Classes, other Backward Classes, Scheduled castes and scheduled Tribes from EWS Reservation.

                           In 103^rd Amendment Article 15 (6) and 16 (6) got inserted which provides 10% reservation to Economically weaker section other than OBCs/SCs/STs  in Government Jobs and in Admissions.

 

        EWS Quota reservation is based on the report given by the commission headed by retired Major General S.R. Sinho.

Report of commission on EWS reservation:

                         This commission gave the report that the General class families below poverty line and whose annual income is below 8 lakhs should be considered as Economically Backward Class. Based on the commission report employment and admission was notified in 2019 by Department of personnel and Training. In the notification it was mentioned that for EWS Quota Reservation , person should not be covered in the reservation based on OBC/SC/ST category, family should not possess certain asserts.

         When in 2021, Supreme Court asked that how Government has decided that Rs 8 Lakhs should be the criteria for EWS reservation, the committee formed by the Government said that 8 Lakhs is reasonable limit and said that if any family has land more than or equal to 5 Acres will be excluded from EWS reservation.

 

103^rd Amendment violates Article 15 and 16 and basic structure of Constitution: 

              103^rd Amendment was challenged saying it violates Article 15  which prohibits discrimination on the basis of caste, race, religion, sex or place of birth and Article 16 which guarantees equal opportunities in public employment. 

       Argument given in court against 103^rd Amendment as , it violates the basic structure of constitution. It says that under constitution basic structure, special protection was given to socially disadvantageous group and as 103^rd Amendment excludes socially disadvantageous group from EWS reservation, so it violates basic structure of constitution.

State cannot compel private unaided institution:

       Another argument was given that state can not compel private unaided private Institution to implement reservation and admit students on the basis of any other criteria other than the merit. Practice trade is their fundamental right and it can not be violated by the state.

             The ministry of social Justice and Empowerment  gave it’s argument saying that state has the duty to protect Economically weaker section under Article 46 of the constitution which is part of Directive Principles of state policy.

                Argument against 103^rd constitutional amendment was given as- it attacks  constitutional vision of social justice and it’s fraud on constitution and this will end quality of opportunity.

Guard rails in case of reservation:

            Senior Advocate Meenakshi  Arora told the bench that in case of EWS Quota there is no guard rails (a bar or fence fixed for safety at the edge of road, bridge or stairs) not even at the end point where as in case of backward class reservation “Once they are adequately represented, there is an endpoint.”

                 Supreme court in reply said that there is no guard rails in case of women reservation as in Article 15(3) which is part of original constitution says that till we raise the status of women through employment , reservation will be there, so no guard rails in case of women reservation. So, Article 15(3) enables the state to make special provision for women and children. SC bench said that 103^rd constitutional Amendment is to benefit the target group is not unlawful.

 

Reservation cannot be given on Economic basis:

                           Lawyers said that EWS quota on the basis of financial position is not a poverty alleviation scheme, so it’s unconstitutional, unwarranted and illegal  .According to previous judgements in cases of Indra Swahane or Mandal Verdict , it is said that economic criteria only can not be the basis of reservation.

No research before giving reservation:

        Lawyer Ravi Kumar Verma told the court that 103^rd constitutional Amendment for EWS is given without any research or without any census. At most 5% of population is economically backward. There is not any authentic data for it that if really they are economically backward. If it’s 5% population then how 10% reservation can be there for 5% population. So, it’s prohibition of right to equality.

So many reservation benefits for SC,ST and OBC:

                       Attorney General K .K Venugopal  told Supreme Court that EWS Quota reservation is not hampering the reservation given to OBC,SC and ST as it is independent of their 50% reservation.So,it’s also not violating the basic structure of constitution as reservation is not beyond 50%.He told that there is no discrimination with SC,ST or OBC as discrimination occours if two classes are similarly placed.SC,ST,OBC are taking many benefits due to the given reservation.SC and ST are given reservation in promotions,local bodies and legislature. Different Articles  shows reservation for SC,ST in promotion,reservation in panchayat,reservation in House of people and reservation in Lagislative assembly.

                  So,when they are given reservation benefits as they are backward ,how it can be said that EWS quota violates right to equality.SC,ST ,OBC are enjoying diffirent reservation benefits since long and EWS Quota reservation is given for the first time.

Basis of 10% EWS Quota reservation:

                    Supreme Court then asked that why 10% EWS reservation is given from 50% General quota as it’s reducing general quota seats and OBC creamy layer seats.Center can not cross the limit of 50% reservation.In the answer Attorney General told Supreme Court that 10% reservation in 50% general quota is not violating the reservation limit. 18% of general category is living below poverty line and there is no benefit for them in Article 15 (4 and 5).So,there should be some benefit like reservation for them .

Alternate of EWS Quota reservation :

                  Chief Justice of India U.U Lalit while hearing the issue said that economic backwardness can be temporary and it can be  removed through affirmative measures like providing scholarship and fee concession.Answering Justice Maheswani point that no methodology and no guideline is there to point out who should be in EWS Quota ,Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that absence of guideline is not a ground for challenging amendment.Economic justice should be given to economic weaker section as it is fundamental part of preamble.

                                                   Now as  the ball is in the Supreme Court’s court ,everybody have to wait for the final verdict . One thing is final that students will suffer a lot if court is giving the decision against the reservation .