EWS Quota Case Hearing Day 5 - Live Updates From Supreme Court

Jethmalani (referring to Mandal Commission report): Conclusion was to determine the criteria for SEBCs, to make advancements for SEBCs, to examine desirability of reservations in favour of SEBCs, and making recommendations.

No term of reference pertaining to forward class. 

Sr. Adv. Jethmalani for State of MP refers to Indra Sawhney judgement.

MP: "One cannot use the constitution for destroying itself." The question is are we using the amendment to destroy the constitution by itself? 

MP: "Procedure established by law means any procedure by parliament...Supreme Court held in Menaka Gandhi that procedure must not violate 21..."

MP: "Every right has a content, each FR has an intrinsic value. FR is limitation to power of state..."

MP: "A strict literal approach should be adopted. Constitution should be interpreted in a wide and liberal manner"

[Counsel for State of MP continues reading from Nagaraj judgement]

Counsel for State of MP refers to Nagaraj Judgement.

MP: Since the fulcrum of the case is the economic criteria for reservation and TN has said it should be sent to larger bench, I'll start with reading of Indra Sawhney.

State of MP: Those in 16(4) have the same position as forward class minus the EWS. If EWS is held as valid, it'll be for both.

CJI: So far as open category is concerned, you're reducing that from 50% to 40%.

Counsel for State of Madhya Pradesh commences his arguments.