In the Bar and Bench report, the top court said, “Reservation as a traditional concept is not for financial empowerment, it is for social empowerment, it is not only for improving economic condition or condition.”
A five-judge bench, including Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit, was hearing petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 103rd Amendment on Thursday.
The amendment provides for 10 per cent reservation of seats in public and private educational institutions and in public employment for “economically weaker sections” of citizens other than scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.
However, the petitioners objected that economic classification cannot be the sole basis for granting reservation. It further said that the inclusion of EWS candidates is violative of the Constitution as it violates the overall 50 per cent ceiling of reservation.
ALSO READ: Kerala HC stays PFI’s morning-evening strike against NIA, ED
Meanwhile, senior advocate Vibha Dutta Makhija, appearing for some of the EWS candidates, questioned, ,Does the constitution want to limit reservation to castes only?
During the debate it emerged that there is no identification method for EWS. To which Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the lack of guidelines may not be enough to declare the amendment unconstitutional.