EWS Quota Is Reservation For The Over-Represented, Excludes The Real Unrepresented : Mohan Gopal On Supreme Court Judgment | Interview

According to renowned academician Professor Dr. Mohan Gopal, the Supreme Court's majority judgment which upheld the reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) as introduced by the 103rd Constitution Amendment is comparable to the infamous emergency era judgment in the case ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla."This is the ADM Jabalpur moment for social justice", he said speaking in an interview with LiveLaw."I have no doubt in my mind that one day that the majority judgment will be considered as a judgment which brings shame to the Supreme Court and that one day it will be reversed. So we have to treat it the way we treated ADM Jabalpur all along", said Prof.Gopal, who had appeared for some petitioners in the Supreme Court opposing the 103rd Constitution Amendment.But he added that there are "two HR Khannas" in this case, referring to the dissenting views expressed by Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat."We must understand that two very experienced judges after careful consideration have said not only that this is unconstitutional but also that it destroys the social fabric of equality".Reservation only for forward classes violates social fabricProfessor Gopal explained that confining the EWS quota only to the forward classes, excluding the poor among the SC/ST/OBC categories, will destroy the social fabric of equality. This scheme undermines the concept of reservation as a tool for representation."Reservation is only a tool for representation and reservation is a dangerous tool if it is used beyond that. It should not be allowed to run loose in society because it will eat up the equality of opportunities", he said. What the EWS does is to confer benefits to the classes who have more than adequate representation in education and services."The amendment specifically excluded from EWS quota categories covered under Articles 15(4) and 16(4). People with other forms of reservation are eligible for EWS, like sports quota. Why didn't the amendment say that only those who have no other reservation can get EWS quota and excluded only those covered under 15(4) and 16(4)?", he askedArticle 16(4) of the Constitution, which allows reservation for backward classes in services is subject to the condition that they are not adequately represented. However, there is no such rider for the 10% EWS quota in services, which has been introduced as per the newly introduced Article 16(6)."You have Article16(4) that says give reservation for those who do not have adequate representation. Now you have Article 16(6) that says you shall give reservation for those who are more than adequately represented. So you are overriding Article 16(4) because you're saying you have a special provision for those who have more than adequate representation".The majority judgment has not dealt with these aspects, he opined."Reservation is only a tool for representation. If you say that this tool is is not effective, and there is a better better way of securing the representation, we will accept it. We are not interested in protecting reservation. We are interested only in securing representation. But now we've realized that this (EWS) reservation is anti-democratic reservation and anti-representation reservation. It is reservation that takes 10 percent of public employment and 10 percent of education and makes it permanently non-representative and ensures there is no social representation in that 10 percent and it is confined only to the forward social and educationally forward classes. Is that good for the country?".EWS reservation is to give reservation to those who are more than adequately represented and prevents the transformation of Indian state as a representative State : Mohan Gopal.#SupremeCourtOfIndia pic.twitter.com/ylymLU9GKn— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) November 12, 2022 Criticises the logic that exclusion of SC/ST/OBC from EWS is to prevent "double benefits"Professor Gopal criticised the view taken by the majority judgment that the exclusion of the poor among the SC/ST/OBC from EWS is to prevent the conferring of "double benefits". He pointed out that SC/ST/OBC persons are not excluded from other forms of reservation like disability reservation."Those who are provided SC/ST/OBC reservation have eligibility for several other types of reservations - sportspersons reservation, disability reservation, domiciliary reservation... if they're children of officials they have reservations. There are so many reservations that they are entitled. Isn't that double reservation?", he asked."So we know this is a false argument that there is double reservation. So what can be the the genuine reason? Why you are picking out SC/ST/OBC reservations as wrong reservation while saying others must also get the similar kind of reservation? Why this concerted attack on that? Have we heard a serious attack that EWS will reduce merit in public employment or in education? So why this singling out of reservation for a SC/ST/OBC?", he...

EWS Quota Is Reservation For The Over-Represented, Excludes The Real Unrepresented : Mohan Gopal On Supreme Court Judgment | Interview

Manu Sebastian

Tags