Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petitions Filed Against Judgment Upholding EWS Quota

The Supreme Court has dismissed the review petition filed against the Constitution Bench judgment which upheld the validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment which introduced 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in education and public employment.

A 5 judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice S Ravindra Bhat, Justice Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala dismissed the review petition.

"Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed", the bench recorded in the order passed on May 9.

It may be noted that on November 7, 2022, the 5 judge bench had upheld the EWS quota by 3:2 majority, with the then CJI UU Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat dissenting. Since Justice Lalit has retired, the review bench was led by the incumbent CJI Justice Chandrachud.

The majority view held that introduction of reservation on the basis of economic criteria was not violative of the basic structure of the Constitution. The majority also found that there was nothing discriminatory in excluding persons who are entitled to SC/ST/OBC reservations from the ambit of economic reservations. The majority further held that breach of 50% ceiling limit by EWS reservation does not violate basic structure.

The dissenting judgment authored by Justice Ravindra Bhat held that by excluding the poor among SC/ST/OBC from economically backward classes (on the ground that they have enjoyed benefits), the 103rd Amendment practices constitutionally prohibited forms of discrimination. CJI UU Lalit had concurred with Justice Bhat's view.

Various individuals and organizations like Society for the Rights of Backward Communities, All India Backward Classes Forum sought review of the judgment contending, inter-alia, that the EWS quota in effect works as reservation for the upper castes and that it was grossly unfair and discriminatory to exclude the bulk of the poor who belong to SC/ST/OBC categories.

Case Title : Society for the Rights of Backward Communities vs Janhit Abhiyan and others

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 441

Click here to read the order