EWS reservation: Quota ceiling not inviolable golden rule, Centre tells SC | India News

NEW DELHI: Validity of Amendment to the 103rd Constitution will be decided on whether it violates its basic structure by allowing reservations on economic grounds and breaching the 50% cap, the Center on Thursday argued before the Supreme Court. high that the amendment did in fact strengthen the basic structure of the Constitution by ensuring economic justice. to its citizens and the upper limit of the quota is not the sacrosanct golden rule.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told a bench of Chief Justice UU Lalit and Judges Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala that economic weakness is also an obstacle to social mobility. and those left behind due to poverty should be given preferential treatment. He said the 50% limit is a rule of thumb but not sacrosanct and it cannot be raised to a basic structural level like opponents. EWS . Quota.
“It has been submitted that the basic structure can only be violated when the change brought about by the constitutional amendment is of such magnitude and proportion that it leads to a fundamental change in the identity of the Constitution. its basic law or function. It is submitted that not every change to the basic features which does not fundamentally alter the underlying characteristics and which only makes minor deviations or additions, will not attract a limitation on the possibility of modification. of the basic structure of the Constitution,” said SG.
He submitted that economic justice was part of the preamble to the Constitution, and the summit court also in his various statements emphasized the conformity of economic criteria.
“It cannot be said that a concealed constitutional amendment violates the basic structure. On the contrary, the unsuccessful constitutional amendment augments the judicial checks applied in different judgments through the qualitative exclusion of the cream layer from the different classes set forth in Article 16 (4). ). The judicial interpretation of qualitative exclusions on the basis of economic criteria is itself an expression of the acceptance of the appropriateness of economic criteria surrounding affirmative action. In that case, maintaining reservations based solely on economic criteria cannot change the basic structure of the Constitution,” he said.
“This court in various rulings has expressed the quantitative limit of 50% as the upper limit on the degree of reservation before the constitutional amendment. It can be noted, however, that an evaluative survey and scrutiny of the language used in the rulings makes it clear that the 50% rule, if any, is a rule of thumb and not a rule of thumb. is the inviolable golden rule,” he said.

Source link


News 7D: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button