Parikh: It was this imbalance which was sought to be redressed by means of reservation.
Parikh: The objective behind reservation was to ensure adequate representation of socially and educationally backward communities.
Parikh: Lordships may now come to my note. What is substantive Equality? [Reads from his note]
Parikh: 15(4) when it came, it had in mind weaker sections what was in 46 also. This was also in Champakam and then we see observation of Justice Sawant too.
Sr. Adv. Parikh reads from the parliamentary debates on Article 46 and what weaker sections mean under 46.
Parikh [quotes from Parliamentary debates]
J Bhat: It is this where we find Prof K.T. Shah's comments on economically backward classes?
Parikh: No, it's Dr. Ambedkar
Parikh: If you look at 46, the distinction as far as 15(4) is concerned, virtually whatever was given in 16(4) was taken in 15(4). One aspect comes out when read with 46- weaker sections of SC/STs...
Parikh: If your lordships look at the other part whether economic criteria can come in at all, my submission is economic criteria was not accepted. One important factor in Champakam which was stuck down. Look at 15(4)...
J Bhat: Both the previous counsels have told us about the idea of reservation on account of stigmatization and marginalisation. You can take it further.
Parikh: When we look at it, backward classes mentioned here are ultimately SEBCs.
Parikh: The drafting committee had to reconcile three principles - one, equality of opportunity, two, reservation for certain communities...
J Bhat: We can read this, just give us the idea. Even other counsels have to come.