EWS quota: All that you need to know about the issue in the Supreme Court

The 103rd amendment act provided a 10 per cent quota in educational institutes and government jobs to economically weaker sections (EWS) of the society

The Supreme Court (SC) is hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 103rd amendment act, passed on January 12, 2019. The amendment provided a 10 per cent quota in educational institutes and government jobs to economically weaker sections (EWS) of the society.

"The persons belonging to EWSs who are not covered under the scheme of reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs shall get 10 per cent reservation in direct recruitment in civil posts and services in the Government of India," the official notification read.

Families other than those covered in SC, ST, and OBC with a gross annual income of less than Rs 8 lakh per annum are eligible to be covered as EWS after the Act was passed.

"The term 'Family' for this purpose will include the person who seeks the benefit of reservation, his/her parents and siblings below the age of 18 years as also his/her spouse and children below the age of 18 years," the Act says.

The educational institutes run by minority communities were excluded from the ambit of the Act.

EWS case: A brief timeline

January 9, 2019: The Parliament enacted the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019

January 10, 2019: First writ petition against the act filed by Youth For Equality. In total 20 such petitions have been filed in the court.

January 12, 2019: The President gives his assent on the Act. 

March 12, 2019: A three-judge bench starts hearing the petitions in the Supreme Court 

August 5, 2019: SC decides to refer the case to a five-judge bench

September 13, 2022: SC bench headed by chief justice UU Lalit starts hearing the case

Why was the amendment challenged in court?

On January 14, 2019, several petitions were filed in the Supreme Court stating that the amendment violates the "basic structure" of the constitution.

In the Indra Sawhney & Others vs Union of India case, 1992, the Supreme Court stated that no amendment that violates the constitution's basic structure would be valid.

It further stated that the total number of reserved seats and positions could not exceed 50 per cent of the total. Also, economic backwardness cannot be the sole reason for reservation.

What are the major issues SC has to decide?

There are three main points the Supreme Court has to decide:

1. Is the reservation based solely on economic backwardness constitutionally valid?
2. Is the reservation in private institutes based on EWS valid?
3. The Act excludes SCs, STs, and OBCs from the definition of EWS. Is that constitutionally valid?

What is the government's stance?

The government has stated that although the 50 per cent limit was fixed in the 1992 judgement, it can be breached if quantifiable data supports the argument.

Also, it added that the Act aims to bring equality to society, and EWS can be uplifted solely on economic grounds.