But Dr BR Ambedkar’s grandson Prakash Ambedkar says that the Supreme Court’s decision is against the constitutional provisions.
But Dr BR Ambedkar’s grandson Prakash Ambedkar says that the Supreme Court’s decision is against the constitutional provisions.
after the Supreme Court Upheld the validity of 10% reservation In government jobs and educational institutions for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Monday said the reservation would be applicable to the poor sections of Maratha as well as minority communities.
Speaking in Mumbai, Mr. Fadnavis spoke 103. thanked the Supreme Court for the decision to uphold third Appreciated it for validating the efforts of Narendra Modi government in amending the Constitution and ensuring social justice for the poor of the country.
“The classes which were not getting reservation but were economically backward, they will now avail the benefit of EWS reservation. The question of Maratha reservation in Maharashtra is long pending. Now, the poor section of Maratha community as well as minorities will be eligible for reservation under EWS quota. The Supreme Court’s decision has opened new avenues of education and employment for the poor who do not get reservation on the basis of caste.
In May last year, the Supreme Court struck down the reservation for the Maratha community (which was approved during Mr Fadnavis’s BJP-led government), calling it “unconstitutional”.
While Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, too, welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision and thanked the Center for its efforts to bring the poor into the mainstream, Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) leader Prakash Ambedkar expressed an outpouring of discord against the court’s decision. hit the note. Grandson of Dr BR Ambedkar.
Terming the Supreme Court judgment as “intellectually corrupt” and “cannot be upheld under any circumstances”, Mr Prakash Ambedkar said it was tantamount to the introduction of ‘Manusmriti’ from the back door.
“The SC verdict divides the society on the basis of reservation. This not only harms the constitutional principle of social mobility but destroys it,” the VBA chief said.
“The first question is under what provision is Parliament authorized to introduce a new doctrine in the Constitution. Article 368 states that under the powers of amendment, addition, variation and deletion, an addition can be made to the ‘social principle’ of reservation, which has already been accepted by the Supreme Court. There is no variation or deletion here because it is a new theory. The Supreme Court itself says that social and economic reservation are two different things.
He argued that the principle of social reservation, which was the basic structure of the Constitution, was modified by introducing “economic principle as reservation principle”.
“Once you say that the two are different, the source of the power of Parliament to introduce a new principle also has to be specified by the SC, which they have not done in this case,” Mr. Ambedkar said.
He further said that very soon, dissident communities like Marathas, Patidars, Gurjars and Jats will take to the streets and demand reservation along with the OBC community.