EWS Reservation- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing DAY 2- LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

14 Sep 2022 5:03 AM GMT

  • EWS Reservation- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing DAY 2- LIVE UPDATES

    The Supreme Court Constitution Bench will commence the hearing on the cases challenging the constitutional validity of reservation for economically weaker section of citizens. The petitions challenge the validity of Constitution (103rd) Amendment Act 2019. Economic reservation in jobs and education was proposed to be provided by inserting clause (6) in Articles 15 and 16 of the...

    The Supreme Court Constitution Bench will commence the hearing on the cases challenging the constitutional validity of reservation for economically weaker section of citizens. 

    The petitions challenge the validity of Constitution (103rd) Amendment Act 2019. Economic reservation in jobs and education was proposed to be provided by inserting clause (6) in Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution through the amendment passed by the Parliament in January 2019. The newly inserted Article 15(6) enabled the State to make special provisions for advancement of any economically weaker section of citizens, including reservations in educational institutions. It states that such reservation can be made in any educational institution, including private institutions, whether aided or unaided, except minority educational institutions covered under Article 30(1). It further states that the upper limit of the reservation will be ten percent, which will be in addition to the existing reservations. After the amendment was notified by the President, a batch of petitions were filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of economic reservation.

    FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES HERE

    Live Updates

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:14 AM GMT

      Wilson: How I say reservation to forward class is a violation of basic structure of Constitution, I will take you to Ashoka Kumar Thakur case - 2008 6 SCC.

      [Reads from the Ashoka Kumar Judgement]

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:14 AM GMT

      Wilson [reads from judgement]: "In view of the fact that the group is identified on economic criteria which is disapproved by SC in Indira Sawhney, the ratio holds good equally for identifying for the 10%..." 

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:09 AM GMT

      Wilson [while referring to the Gujarat HC Judgement]: "Thus, it is clear that economic criteria cannot be the sole criteria for purpose of reservation... reservations cannot exceed 50%..."

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:09 AM GMT

      Wilson: Cause title was Dayaram Verma v. State of Gujarat.

      The issues pointed by the division bench are in para 29 [refers to the judgement]

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:06 AM GMT

      Wilson: What happened is as a test, this was introduced in Gujarat. Ordinance 1 of 2016, a replica of amendment was introduced. This was challenged in Gujarat HC. The HC quashed this ordinance.

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:06 AM GMT

      Wilson continues reading from the Indira Sawhney judgement.

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:02 AM GMT

      Wilson: They then reframed questions. [Refers to the reframed questions] 

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:02 AM GMT

      Wilson: Originally 8 issues were framed. One of the issues was examining of 16(1) itself - if economic criteria by itself could not constitute a class...

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:01 AM GMT

      Wilson refers to clauses of the OM and the issues framed in the Indira Sawhney Judgement.

    • 14 Sep 2022 10:01 AM GMT

      Wilson refers to the said OM challenged in the Indira Sawhney judgement.

      Wilson: There was much hue and cry when first reservation of 27% was given and therefore they bought an amendment.

    Next Story