Economically Weaker Section

Reservation policies, aimed at addressing historical and systemic inequalities, have been extended to include Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) through the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2019. While proponents argue that economic criteria offer a fairer assessment of disadvantage and promote a casteless society, critics contend that reservations should primarily address historical injustices rather than economic status. The Supreme Court's 3:2 verdict upholding the 103rd Amendment Act was based on arguments that economic reservation doesn't violate the Constitution and exclusion of reserved classes from EWS is justified. However, dissenting judges raised concerns about excluding backward classes and breaching the 50% reservation ceiling. Moving forward, there is a need to balance reservation policies with broader measures to enhance education quality and social upliftment for genuine societal equity.

Reservation, in the context of affirmative action policies, is designed to address historical and systemic inequalities by providing access to preferred positions in society for members who have been historically excluded or are under-represented. These affirmative actions aim to ensure social justice by offering special opportunities to marginalized or disadvantaged groups, particularly those belonging to backward classes, in order to help them catch up with more privileged segments of society, such as the “forward castes". By implementing reservation policies, societies strive to create a more equitable and inclusive environment where individuals from all backgrounds have equal opportunities to thrive and contribute to the progress of the community as a whole.

In the Indra Sawhney case (1992), the Supreme Court ruled against reservation solely based on economic criteria due to lack of constitutional provision.The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019 altered Articles 15 and 16 to permit reservations for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) up to 10% in government jobs and educational institutions. Article 15(6) now allows the State to take measures for the advancement of economically weaker sections, while Article 16(6) enables reservation of appointments for them

Criteria to identify EWS

• Candidate must belong only to general category
• The annual family income must be below Rs 8 lakhs
• His/her family must not own any of the following:
• an agricultural land of more than 5 acres.
• They must not own a residence larger than 1,000 sq ft
• Residential plot of 100 sq. yards and above in notified municipalities
• Residential plot of 200 sq. yards and above in. areas other than the notified municipalities.

• Constitutional Mandate under Article 46: Article 46 mandates promoting the educational and economic interests of weaker sections, providing a constitutional basis for considering economic criteria in reservations.
• Need for New Deprivation Assessment Criteria: Economic factors offer a more accurate indicator of disadvantage than caste-centric criteria in a capitalist world.
• Pave Way for Casteless Society: By allocating opportunities based on economic status rather than caste, economic reservations can contribute to a society where individuals are treated equally, regardless of their caste background, promoting social harmony and a casteless society.

• Purpose of Reservation: Reservation aims to undo historical injustices rather than serving as an anti-poverty program, focusing on addressing systemic discrimination and providing opportunities to marginalized groups.
• Policy/Administrative Issues: Challenges include an arbitrary income ceiling of 8 lakh, broad criteria leading to a lack of correlation between the 10% reservation and EWS population.
• Against Indira Sawhney judgement: In Indra Sawhney,Supreme Court has denied reservation solely on economic criteria as well as 50% cap on reservation
• It opens up Pandora's box of demands for reservations from various communities on other criteria
• The reduction in public sector job opportunities may hinder the effective utilization of reservation benefits for economically weaker sections
• lacks explicit endorsement by the Sinho Commission setup to study EWS reservation.

Grounds on which 103rd Amendment was challenged in the Supreme Court:

• Violation of equality principle: Introduction of economic criterion deviates from addressing historical disadvantages faced by socially and educationally backward groups.
• Exclusion of OBC/SC/ST candidates: EWS category excludes OBC/SC/ST candidates, potentially exacerbating existing inequalities.
• Breach of 50% reservation ceiling: The amendment surpasses the reservation limit set in the Indira Sawhney Judgment, raising concerns about its constitutionality and adherence to legal precedent

103rd Amendment Act Upheld: Supreme Court, by a majority of 3:2 upheld the reservation.

• Not against basic structure: The Suprem
  • 96259-21993,
  • 93132-18122

  • 96259-21993,
  • 93132-18122

  Most Affordable IAS Coaching in India