[EWS Judgment] Reservation should not continue indefinitely: Justice JB Pardiwala

While concurring with two other Supreme Court judges in upholding the constitutional validity of the Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act which provided for reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), Justice JB Pardiwala said that reservation should not continue for an indefinite time. .In his 117-page judgment, Justice Pardiwala held that development and the spread of education have resulted in tapering the gap between different classes to a considerable extent. Therefore,“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,” the judgment said. .The judge said that it is was necessary to review the method of identification and determination of backward classes, and to ascertain whether the criteria applied for such classification of backward classes is relevant in today’s scenario."The idea of Baba Saheb Ambedkar was to bring social harmony by introducing reservation for only ten years. However, it has continued past seven decades. Reservation should not continue for an indefinite period of time so as to become a vested interest.".Justice Pardiwala was of the view that the new concept of economic criteria introduced by the 103rd Amendment for affirmative action may go a long way in eradicating caste-based reservation.“It may be perceived as a first step in the process of doing away with caste-based reservation.”.He reasoned that the Amendment signifies Parliament’s intention to expand affirmative action to hitherto untouched groups who suffer from similar disadvantages as the OBCs competing for opportunities.If economic advance can be accepted to negate certain social disadvantages for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), the converse would be equally relevant, at least for considering the competing disadvantages of the EWS, he said. “The 103rd Amendment offers a basis not frowned upon by Article 15(1) or 16(2) for providing a population generic and caste/religion/community neutral criteria. It also harmonizes with the eventual constitutional goal of a casteless society.”.The judgment further said that the words “weaker sections” used in Article 46 cannot be read to mean only the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes.“The expression refers to all weaker sections and in particular the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Inasmuch as, if we confine the meaning of the expression “weaker sections” only to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the likes, namely backward class, then it will expose the weaker sections of citizens, other than the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and backward class people to exploitation without any protection from it.”.He concluded that the EWS reservation is not an end, but a means to secure social and economic justice which 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 i.e., almost seven decades back and it still continues.".Justice Pardiwala thus concurred with the views of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Bela M Trivedi that the amendments are valid. He disagreed with views of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit and Justice Ravindra Bhat, who had struck down the Amendment..We need to revisit reservation system in the larger interest of society: Justice Bela M Trivedi in EWS judgment.[Read judgment]