+ A
A -
IANS
New Delhi
Challenging the Constitutional validity of the 10 percent reservation in jobs and education to upper castes, a petition was filed before the Supreme Court on Thursday seeking stay of the operation of the Constitution (103rd) Amendment Act.
Filed by Youth For Equality, a Delhi-based NGO, the petition contends that the amendment violates the “basic structure” of the Constitution. It cited the 1992 Indira Sawhney case in which the Supreme Court held that economic criteria cannot be the sole basis of reservations under the Constitution.
“The (103rd) Constitution Amendment completely violates the Constitutional norm that economic criterion cannot be the only basis of reservation as has been laid down by the 9 judges in Indira Sawhney. Such an amendment is vulnerable and ought to be struck down as it negates a binding judgement,” read the petition.
It stated the amendment breaches the 50 percent cap set by Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney case.
“By way of the present amendments, the exclusion of the OBCs and the SCs/STs from the scope of the economic reservation essentially implies that only those who are poor from the general categories would avail of the benefits of the quotas.
“Taken together with the fact that the high creamy layer limit of Rs8 lakh per annum ensures that the elite in the OBCs and SCs/STs capture the reservation benefits repeatedly, the poor sections of these categories remain completely deprived. This is an overwhelming violation of the basic feature of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution and elsewhere”, it said.
New Delhi
Challenging the Constitutional validity of the 10 percent reservation in jobs and education to upper castes, a petition was filed before the Supreme Court on Thursday seeking stay of the operation of the Constitution (103rd) Amendment Act.
Filed by Youth For Equality, a Delhi-based NGO, the petition contends that the amendment violates the “basic structure” of the Constitution. It cited the 1992 Indira Sawhney case in which the Supreme Court held that economic criteria cannot be the sole basis of reservations under the Constitution.
“The (103rd) Constitution Amendment completely violates the Constitutional norm that economic criterion cannot be the only basis of reservation as has been laid down by the 9 judges in Indira Sawhney. Such an amendment is vulnerable and ought to be struck down as it negates a binding judgement,” read the petition.
It stated the amendment breaches the 50 percent cap set by Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney case.
“By way of the present amendments, the exclusion of the OBCs and the SCs/STs from the scope of the economic reservation essentially implies that only those who are poor from the general categories would avail of the benefits of the quotas.
“Taken together with the fact that the high creamy layer limit of Rs8 lakh per annum ensures that the elite in the OBCs and SCs/STs capture the reservation benefits repeatedly, the poor sections of these categories remain completely deprived. This is an overwhelming violation of the basic feature of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution and elsewhere”, it said.
