SC to Centre: How did you fix EWS quota ceiling? | Economic Times

The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to explain how it fixed ₹8 lakh as income limit for determining whether someone qualified for seats reserved for Economically Weaker Sections. After the Centre failed to give reasons, the court warned that it may stay the notification unless the government gave satisfactory answers on the inputs that contributed to determining the income limit."You cannot pull out any figure (such as ₹8 lakh) out of thin air. You must have some data demographic, sociological or socio-economic data. You are making unequals equals by applying this," said Justice DY Chandrachud, heading a bench which also comprised Justices Vikram Nath and BV Nagarathna.He was referring to the disparity between rural and urban areas in income and assets used to calculate the limit. Justice Chandrachud said that OBC and EWS categories were not on a par in the constitutional scheme of things.The government had used the income ceiling in OBC reservations, meant for 'removing the creamy layer', to determine who all fell in EWS category too. The court, examining a challenge to 10% EWS reservation in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for medical students, has been critical of the income limit but the government has failed to file any affidavit despite being asked to do so at the hearing on October 7.While OBC quotas were extended in recognition of socio-educational backwardness, the EWS quota was not, Justice Chandrachud said. "These are policy issues... but we will have to interfere. Set your house in order," he said. It also elucidated the points which the government would have to meet in its affidavit. They include the criteria and reports if any on which the limit was based.The bench also sought to know if the limit was over-inclusive, had considered difference in purchasing power in urban and rural belts and if there was any method to implement it. "We make it clear that we are not entering policy but need disclosure for adhering to constitutional principles. It would be necessary for the Centre to disclose before this court the nature of exercise undertaken in accordance with Article 15(2)."Representing the Centre, additional solicitor general KM Nataraj assured the court that the government would file a reply, possibly in the next 2-3 days. The bench will hear the case again on October 28. The EWS quota has attracted much controversy and litigation as it takes the total reservations beyond SC-mandated 50%. An explanation to the 103rd Constitution Amendment to Articles 15 and 16 says that EWS may be notified by the state from time to time on the basis of family income and other indicators of economic disadvantage. The courts expect any affirmative action to be a well-deliberated policy as the Constitution bars discrimination between citizens and any exception for any section must be justified.