Supreme Court allows appeal on Gujarat’s EWS quota

The Supreme Court on Friday admitted an appeal filed by the Gujarat government against a judgment of the Gujarat high court quashing the 10 per cent quota ordinance for economically weaker sections in the state on condition that the state should not give jobs or make fresh admissions for general category students under the 10 per cent quota.

Though a three-judge bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices A.M. Kanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud had on August 22 stayed the Gujarat HC order and on August 29 this was extended till Friday. Attorney-general Mukul Rohatgi, for the Gujarat government, informed the court that the state will not give effect to the ordinance and said the matter will have to be heard by a constitution bench of five judges. The CJI said the three judge bench will consider referring it to Constitution bench on the next date of hearing after replies and rejoinders are filed in eight weeks.

In a brief order, the bench said “until further orders of this court, we direct that admissions made to any educational institution on the basis of this ordinance prior to the pronouncement of the judgment by the HC, shall not be disturbed. Since the HC has set aside the ordinance (notification), no further action towards implementation of the said notification is possible in respect of the education and services.”

Gujarat issued the ordinance in May, providing 10 per cent quota for EWS in the general category in the wake of agitation by the Patel community for their inclusion in OBC, and it was struck down by the high court.

In its appeal, Gujarat said the high court had failed to consider that the provision as regards the earmarking 10 per cent for Economically Weaker Class in the matters of admission and appointment is not “reservation,” but a further classification in the General/Open/Unreserved category of citizens of the state and that, therefore, the impugned judgment deserves to be held bad.

The state said the High Court had failed to consider that mere use of expression ‘reservation’ in the Ordinance for 10% of available seats in the educational institution and in the appointments under the State service will not per se brand the same as reservation contemplated under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution.

The State is enjoined to reach out to more deserving people and the task of finding out the most deserving, must necessarily be a matter of continuous evolution and that therefore, the State cannot blind itself to the existence of other instances of weakness including the economic weakness as sought to be recognized by the Ordinance, is one single instance.

The appeal said it should have been appreciated that in furtherance of the said proposition that the State has promulgated the Ordinance and fixed income limit of Rs. 6 lakhs per annum as one of the eligibility criteria. The appeal prayed for quashing the HC judgment.