The Constitution (124 Amendment) Bill, 2019, was passed recently, which added new clauses to Article 15 and Article 16 of the Indian Constitution. This amendment provides a quota of 10 percent in the government jobs and educational institutions, to the economically weaker sections in the general category. The reservation will be in addition to the existing 50 percent quota, given to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes.
What Is The Criterion For The Economically Backward Class?
For the first time, in the history of India, the reservation will be provided on an economic criterion. The benefits will be provided to those belonging to the economically weaker upper castes and earning less than Rs eight lakh per year. While calculating the income, an individual’s landholding will not be taken into account.
It means that the families that earn below eight lakh in a year, would come into the above-mentioned category. Such families will have a right to claim the benefits of reservation in the schools(for their children), colleges and the jobs in the government sector.
The government will perhaps, implement these amended provisions in the private sector also, both aided and unaided. But, as of now, the minority educational institutions and private institutions are kept out of the ambit of 10 percent EWS quota.
But, the Congress party is demanding judicial scrutiny of the legislation. The party is arguing that the additional quota is a breach of the 50% reservation cap, set during the Indra Sawhney judgment.
What Is Indra Sawhney Judgement of 1980?
The Mandal Commission Report of 1980 was presented in the parliament twice, in 1982 and then in 1983. It recommended extending reservation benefits to socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC).
On August 13, 1990, the V P Singh government issued an Office Memorandum (OM) stating that 27% of vacancies in civil posts and services under the Government of India shall be reserved for SEBC. It was struck down by the apex court after protests erupted against it.
Later, another OM was issued on September 25, 1991, stating that 10% vacancies in civil posts and services under the government of India shall be reserved for other economically backward sections of the people who are not covered by any existing schemes of reservation.
In the Indra Sawhney case, the Supreme court upheld the 27% seat reservation, but the clause of 10% reservation in the civil services and posts was rejected at that time. Also, the overall reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs was capped at 50%.
What Was The Ground To Strike(10% Quota) It Down?
The Indra Sawhney judgment abided Article 15 (4) and Article 16 (4) of the Indian legislation. While striking down the clause of 10% reservation the apex court said “Reservation of 10% vacancies among open competition candidates on the basis of income/property-holding means the exclusion of those above the demarcating line from those 10% seats. The question is whether this is constitutionally permissible. We think not. It may not be permissible to debar a citizen from being considered for appointment to an office under the State solely on the basis of his income or property-holding. Since employment under the State is really conceived to serve the people (that it may also be a source of livelihood is secondary), no such bar can be created…”
In a nutshell, the reservations were meant to be caste-based, as the constitution in its original form did not allow a reservation solely on the economic criterion.
On What Grounds Did The Modi Government Re-introduce The 10% Reservation?
The Modi government on January 7, 2019, approved the proposal of introducing the Bill, which sought to provide 10 % reservation in jobs and educational institutions to economically backward sections in the general category. The government also specified that the court will evaluate the legislation independently, without considering the aforementioned reservation criteria declared in the Indra Sawhney judgment. The government managed to get the Bill passed through both the Upper and Lower houses of the Parliament, regardless of the ‘50% reservation cap‘.
It’s noteworthy that the matter of economic backwardness was never introduced formally in the parliament before. The legislation might have to undergo judicial scrutiny, on the ground that it stretches the limit of reservation from 50% to 60%. The Modi-led government, however, is firm on its stand and argues that the 50% cap is just on paper, and many states have already breached it, while also maintaining that the 10% quota won’t affect the Supreme Court’s ruling of 50 % cap on the reservation for backward classes (BCs).
The SC should ensure that justice is done to the poor and deprived, irrespective of their castes, if the legislation is challenged.