EWS Reservation- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing DAY 3- LIVE UPDATES

J Bhat: To summarize what you're saying is that till now, it is discrimination based. For the first time, disadvantage, a situational factor, not status base is the idea behind this.

Bhat J: Going beyond that into a GO or commission report...

Farasat: Factum that backward classes are poorer of poor is accepted.

CJI: We don't need data.

J Bhat: The statement is there is an exclusion

Bhat J: Indira Sawhney was not concerned with this.

Farasat: You're right, insofar as Indira Sawhney, while replying on Keshavananda... Will you limit it to 31(c) or expand, that's a question..

Bhat J: These are all in context of legislation.

Farasat: Legislative assumptions of facts can be gone into, they're not sacrosanct. The second Indira Sawhney.

Bhat J: In Keshavananda, 31(c) was in question, it was read down. Then too it was found that DPSPs will not be gone into

Farasat: Let's take example of the three concentric circles- the heart is SC/STs. What this amendment does is excludes the heart of it. That violates equality. With that, I submit some data. In Keshavananda Bharti and Indira Sawhney says...

Farasat: 2L an UC is being given benefits. For that, each of lower castes are more deprived. In addition they're also constitutionally recognised discriminated category. 

Farasat: Even then, the exclusion of backward class violates equality code. Taking this example only, this translates to 2 L. The criteria is 8L. 

Farasat: Example I'm from Bihar, my guard comes tells me that I'm Upper caste in Bihar and I've never faced discrimination there. But i only earn 16,000 Rs here. It's difficult to manage. I take the best case scenario and assume that the amendment is for such people.

Farasat: Because it breaches formal and substantive equality both. Second submission is, the text of clause 6 in 15 and 16 has two possible constructions- one to exclude backward classes, one to include. In that case, we will take the latter.

Farasat: I will assume reservation can be an anti deprivation measure. Based on that assumption, I put forth two submission: Even assuming so, exclusion of backward classes, when they're in fact poorer than forward class poor is direct breach of equality code.