EWS Quota Case-Supreme Court Hearing-Day 7 - Live Updates

Wilson: That NSSO data is just a house hold consumer expenditure employment and unemployment data. It was conducted on 124680 households in 7999 villages and no survey was conducted on social conditions.

Wilson: Sinho Commission has recommended to conduct socio economic surveys for forward class. It said that there is no empirical data so far as EWS is concerned. On basis of NSSO, AG submitted. That data itself is wrong.

Wilson: Sinho Commission has said that there is no data so far as EWS is concerned.

Wilson: It said that if you want to give on basis of economic criteria, then abolish all types of reservation and give on basis of this.

Wilson: The question is if poor can be uplifted through reservation? The answer is no because reservation is not a poverty alleviation scheme. The AG and SG relied on Sinho Commission. The Sinho Commission did not recommend for any reservation.

J Bhat: Pramati is a 4 page judgement.

Wilson: Indra Sawhney stated that any reservation on economic criteria would cause virtual deletion of Art 15(4).

J Bhat: Art of responding doesn't mean that you write down and then read it. When Golaknath was argued, it was finished in 3 weeks. Then the propositions were given by counsel who opened, and there were no written submissions and when he reached point 10, justice JC Shah threw his pen and said I won't write now.

Sr. Adv. P. Wilson: This is only a reply.

CJI: We'll ask rejoinder applications to not exceed 3 pages.

Sankaranayanan concludes.

Sankaranayanan: Those words "in addition to" need to be culled. The idea of 50% being in Constitution has been for long.

Sankaranayanan: In a judgement (NJAC) your lordships have said that. Their arguments was what Justice Chelameshwar said in dissent that it was flexible.

I submit that basic structure can be both- flexible or inflexible.