DMK to file review petition against SC verdict upholding 10% EWS quota
On Monday, a five-judge bench of the court had said in a 3-2 judgement that the reservation does not violate the Constitution.
The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam has decided to file a review petition against the Supreme Court verdict to uphold 10% quota to persons from Economically Weaker Sections in admissions and jobs, Live Law reported on Wednesday.
On Tuesday, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam General Secretary and Tamil Nadu minister Duraimurugan had also confirmed the decision, according to The Hindu.
“We will do it to protect the social justice of 82% of SCs/STs [Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes] and OBCs [Other Backward Classes] and the basic structure of the Constitution, and to uphold the judgment in favour of reservation recommended by the Mandal Commission,” he said.
On Monday, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court had upheld the 10% EWS quota in a 3-2 judgement. Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela Trivedi and JB Pardiwala upheld the quota, while Chief Justice UU Lalit and Justice Rabindra Bhat dissented from the majority opinion.
The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam had criticised the verdict, with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin saying on Monday that it was “a setback for our century-long crusade for social justice”. On Tuesday, the party also said that it will convene a meeting of political parties in the state on November 12 to discuss the Supreme Court’s verdict.
EWS quota and Supreme Court verdict
In 2019, the Centre had introduced the Economically Weaker Sections quota for those who cannot avail of the reservations granted to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, but have an annual family income of less than Rs 8 lakh.
Persons from families that own more than five acres of agricultural land or 1,000 square feet of residential land are not eligible for the quota.
The petitioners before the Supreme Court had challenged the 103rd amendment to the Constitution which paved way for the reservation. The amendment introduced changes to Articles 15 and 16, which deal with the right to equality and provide the basis for reservations.
The majority verdict of the Supreme Court held that the allocation of the 10% quota fell within the powers vested with the legislature in the Constitution. On the other hand, the dissenting judges said that the quota cannot keep Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes out of its ambit as the Constitution does not allow exclusion.