New Delhi, Nov 7 (PTI) The reservation for the economically weaker sections is not “an end, but a means” to secure social and economic justice, and it should not be allowed to become a vested interest, Justice J B Pardiwala said on Monday while upholding the constitution amendment on the issue.
The top court in a 3:2 majority decision upheld the 10 per cent reservation for economically weaker sections (EWS) in admissions and government jobs that excluded the poor among the Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) categories.
Quoting B R Ambedkar, Justice Pardiwala said the idea of “Baba Saheb Ambedkar was to bring social harmony by introducing reservation for only 10 years. However, it has continued for the past seven decades.” In his 117-page concurring verdict, he said the reservation should not continue for an indefinite period and if continued, then it is “a vested interest”.
The development and the spread of education have resulted in tapering the gap between different classes to a considerable extent, Justice Pardiwala said.
“As larger percentages of backward class members attain acceptable standards of education and employment, they should be removed from the backward categories so that attention can be paid towards those classes which genuinely need help,” he said.
Justice Pardiwala said it was necessary to review the method of identification and determination of backward classes, and to ascertain whether the criteria applied for such classification of backward classes is relevant in today’s scenario.
He said the new concept of economic criteria introduced by the 103rd amendment for affirmative action may go a long way in eradicating caste-based reservation. “It may be perceived as a first step in the process of doing away with caste-based reservation,” the judge said.
If economic advance can be accepted to negate certain social disadvantages for OBCs, the converse would be equally relevant, at least for considering the competing disadvantages of the EWS, Justice Pardiwala observed.
“The 103rd Amendment offers a basis not frowned upon by Article 15(1) or 16(2) for providing a population generic and caste/religion/community neutral criteria. It also harmonises with the eventual constitutional goal of a casteless society,” he said.
On the issue of continuing with the quota policy, Justice Pardiwala said this exercise of eliminating the causes for backwardness started immediately after Independence that is almost seven decades back and it still continues.
“The longstanding development and the spread of education have resulted in tapering the gap between the classes to a considerable extent. As larger percentages of backward class members attain acceptable standards of education and employment, they should be removed from the backward categories so that the attention can be paid toward those classes which genuinely need help,” he said.
In such circumstances, it is very much necessary to take into review the method of identification and the ways of determining backward classes, and also, ascertain whether the criteria adopted or applied for the classification of backward classes is relevant for today’s conditions, the judge said.
The top court heard as many as 40 petitions and most of the pleas, including the lead one filed by ‘Janhit Abhiyan’ in 2019, challenging the validity of the Constitution Amendment (103rd) Act, 2019.
While justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela M Trivedi and Pardiwala upheld the law, Justice S Ravindra Bhat along with Chief Justice U U Lalit shot down the same in their minority view. The judges, part of a five-judge constitution bench, read four separate judgments for over 35 minutes in the courtroom. PTI SJK SJK ANB ANB
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.