The Supreme Court heard a batch of petitions challenging EWS Reservations, introduced by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment. The matter came before the Division Bench of Justice S.A. Bobde and Justice AK Nazeer.
Mr. Rajeev Dhavan opened arguments on behalf of one of the petitioners. He argued for a stay on the Amendment providing for 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in educational institutions and public employment. His prime objection was that implementing 10% EWS reservations will breach the 50% ceiling in reservations.
Attorney General K.K. Venugopal responded by stating that breaching the 50% ceiling on reservation is no ground for staying the Amendment. He cited Tamil Nadu reservation law, which allows for 69% reservation. Mr. Venugopal told the Bench that a stay could not be imposed on a constitutional amendment and that the petitioners' prayer had been declined previously on two occasions.
Still, Mr. Dhavan urged for a stay saying that appointments made under the EWS category would become difficult to stay at a later date.
Justice Bobde declined to stay the Amendment by stating that any appointment made now under the EWS provision would be subject to the outcome of the challenge. With this, he listed the matter for hearing on 2 May, 2019 (it was not heard on 2 May).