Pinnacle court to concentrate matters challenging EWS quota within the month of July
21-05-2022
The validity of the ₹8 lakh criterion because the annual income limit had acquire question while seeking EWS reservation in PG exam for the 2022-2023 batches
The Supreme Court on May 19 said it'll begin hearing in July a series of petitions challenging the factors fixed by the govt. to spot Economically Weaker Sections [EWS] of the society to grant 10% reservation in education and jobs.
A Bench led by Justice D. Y. Chandrachud has primarily raised the question on the government’s decision to mend ₹8 lakh because the annual income limit to spot the EWS category. The validity of the ₹8 lakh criterion had get question while seeking EWS reservation in National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) admissions.
Senior advocate Arvind Datar, for the petitioners, submitted that the NEET-PG (post graduate) examination for the 2022-2023 batches was due soon.
“We will keep it as soon because the court reopens. we are going to provides a date,” Justice Chandrachud said.
On January 17, 2019, the govt. had released a politician memorandum [OM] informing that families earning a gross annual income below ₹8 lakh would be identified as EWS for the good thing about reservation. The OM was issued just three days before the Constitution (One Hundred and Third) Amendment Act, which introduced the EWS quota, came into force on January 14, 2019.
The court had even wondered whether the ₹8 lakh threshold was “largely based” on the criterion to spot the creamy layer within the Other Backward Class [OBC] quota.
An expert committee headed by former Finance Secretary Ajay Bhushan Pandey, formed by the govt. to review the ₹8 lakh limit, had in its report maintained that the financial threshold wasn't a “mechanical adoption” of the OBC creamy layer cut-off.
“The review committee seems to be just trying to justify the ₹8 lakh limit post facto. they need done their best to justify the ₹8 lakh limit,” Justice Chandrachud had remarked.
The government had defended the annual income limit. law officer Tushar Mehta, for the govt, had asked in court whether anybody with “common sense” would think ₹8 lakh was an “irrational” income limit for determining EWS. He had said that EWS had “stricter criterion” and it considered the gross annual income of the family and not just that of the individual seeking reservation benefits.
Mr. Mehta had said the Pandey Committee report, which said the ₹8 lakh criterion struck a “fine balance” between over-inclusion and inclusion errors.
Mr. Mehta had said the Constitutional term “economically weaker” didn't mean those below the poverty level, but people within the low income groups, who may have small savings, but not enough to reap the advantages of an honest instruction within the best universities, like others.
Mr. Mehta had also denied assertions that the ₹8 lakh criterion was a leaf out of the OBC creamy layer cut-off.
