CJI: ...from a particular caste you can't get it. Therefore, you say is that you have a special reservation so you must confine yourself to that. We will not permit you from that arena to this arena. This is reserved to those who have no reservations.
CJI: Emphasis is that there are certain classes who need special protection. So you have identified scientifically these classes and then said that this is the target class. So up till now you're giving affirmative action but suddenly you're saying now that you're...
J Bhat: To understand that as one homogeneous class is wrong. Each one of them is different. Constitution has seen them as differently- SC, ST and OBC. To tell a man that you're an ST and hence excluded, is that right, answer that.
J Bhat: Adding this EWS, we don't know. But exclusion is what is hurting. The way you can reach is by exclusion.
J Bhat: So to say all unreserved are homogeneous is an assumption. That's not how reservations work.
J Bhat: In case of EWS, there is no status there. OBCs- each caste is a grouping. EWS are also identifiable by some class or caste- they too would be floating. Some would be in 2 years, 3 years. They belong to non backward which means they are not homogeneous.
J Bhat: As far as legal arguments go one can understand. If today your creamy layer def is 8 lakhs and it's 3 years. So in a given set of 3 years you're creamy layer, in other 3 years you're not. It's only a line which is drawn for entitlement.
CJI: Take for instance OBCs above creamy layer, will their share not get reduced? Just as the open general category, for everyone, hasn't the size shrunk? And if it has shrunk at whose expense?
Jethmalani: Supposing forward classes are falling back, is it such a violation of constitution that it destroys its very identity? At the most it is a marginal tweaking.
CJI: What was the criticism of the GO? This was it. Suppose there is 5% seats for muslims, there could be more meritorious muslims who could compete in general category still.