EWS Reservation: Supreme Court dismisses review petitions

Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

While pronouncing the operative part of the judgment, the then CJI UU Lalit had read, "In view of the decision rendered by the majority, the challenge to the 103rd Amendment fails. The writ petition ad other proceedings stands disposed of accordingly".

The Supreme Court on May 9, 2023, dismissed the review petitions filed against its judgment upholding the validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment that introduced 10% reservation for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS).

Notably, the applications for listing the review petitions in open Court were rejected.

A bench comprising of CJI Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud with Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, S Ravindra Bhat, Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala has thus held,

"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".

In November last year, the Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority had upheld the validity of the EWS reservation. 

On September 27, a five-judge Bench led by then Chief Justice of India UU Lalit had reserved its verdict in the petitions challenging the 103rd Constitutional Amendment.

Justice Ravindra Bhat in a dissenting judgment, had held the amendment to be incorrect and not in line with Baba Ambedkar's dream. 

Justice Ravindra Bhat in his dissenting opinion said, "At the outset, it is acknowledged that the doctrine of reasonable classification is not per se a part of the basic structure; it is however, a method evolved by this court to breathe life into and provide content to the right to equality under Article 14 – the latter being a part of the basic structure. The contention made by those supporting the amendment – that treating the SC, ST and OBC as a distinct class from those who are not covered under Article 15(4) and 16(4) is a reasonable classification, necessitates further scrutiny".

Justice Bhat authoring the judgment, also on behalf of CJI UU Lalit, had held Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019 that had inserted clause (6) in Article 15 and clause (6) in Article 16, respectively, as unconstitutional and void on the ground that they are violative of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Justices Maheshwari, Trivedi, and Pardiwala in concurring judgments, had upheld the validity of the reservations. The three judges had opined that the reservation to EWS, fell well within the realms of the basic structure of the Constitution. 

Case Title: Society for the Rights of Backward Communities vs. Janhit Abhiyan & Ors