In a 3:2 majority decision, the Supreme Court upheld the 10 per cent reservation for the economically weaker sections (EWS) in education and government jobs that excluded the poor among the SC, ST and OBC categories.

However, the SC bench observed that the reservation should not continue for an indefinite period and if continued, then it is “a vested interest”.

Justices Bela M. Trivedi and J.B. Pardiwala, who wrote two separate and concurring views with Justice Dinesh Maheshwari in upholding the EWS quota, referred to the time span envisaged by the framers of the Constitution for having reservation in the country.

Key points noted by the SC:

• Reservation is not an end but a means to secure social and economic justice. Reservation should not be allowed to become a vested interest. Real solution, however, lies in eliminating the causes that have led to the social, educational and economic backwardness of the weaker sections of the community. This exercise of eliminating the causes started immediately after the Independence, almost seven decades back and it still continues. 

• The longstanding development and the spread of education have resulted in tapering the gap between the classes to a considerable extent. As larger percentages of backward class members attain acceptable standards of education and employment, they should be removed from the backward categories so that the attention can be paid toward those classes which genuinely need help. 

• In such circumstances, it is very much necessary to take into review the method of identification and the ways of determination of backward classes, and also, ascertain whether the criteria adopted or applied for the classification of backward classes is relevant for today’s conditions. 

• The idea of B.R. Ambedkar was to bring social harmony by introducing reservation for only 10 years. However, it has continued for the past seven decades. Reservation should not continue for an indefinite period of time so as to become a vested interest.

• What was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution and what was sought to be achieved on the completion of 50 years of the advent of the Constitution, that is the policy of reservation must have a time span, has still not been achieved even till this day. 

• It was introduced to correct the historical injustice faced by the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, and to provide them a level playing field to compete with the persons belonging to the forward classes. However, at the end of 75 years of our independence, we need to revisit the system of reservation in the larger interest of the society as a whole, as a step forward towards transformative constitutionalism.

• As per Article 334 of the Constitution, the provisions of the Constitution relating to the reservation of seats for the SCs and the STs in the House of the People and in the Legislative Assemblies of the States would cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of 80 years from the commencement of the Constitution.

• The representation of Anglo-Indian community in the House of the Parliament and in the Legislative Assemblies of the States by nomination, has already ceased by virtue of the 104th Amendment with effect from January 25, 2020. 

• Therefore, a similar time limit if prescribed, for the special provisions in respect of the reservations and representations provided in Article 15 and Article 16 of the Constitution, could be a way forward leading to an egalitarian, casteless and classless society.

Manorama Yearbook app is now available on Google Play Store and iOS App Store