Former Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. file | Photo Credit: PTI
10% upheld with the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court Reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) launched by the Narendra Modi-led central government, former law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has said the judgment upholds Parliament’s ability to change the Constitution, the importance of second-guessing legislative will, for reservation valid on economic criteria and that “perceived disadvantage of one cannot be the basis for depriving other disadvantaged communities of any benefit”.
Read this also | The Curious Case of EWS
in an interview with Hindu, Shri Prasad further argued that this is a sign of evolution of the reservation framework, and this evolution should be allowed to continue without any hindrance. Excerpts:
Why , While Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) attribute their backwardness to their caste-identity, the backwardness of the EWS class is a result of what?
a ,
As far as the OBCs are concerned, remember one thing clearly, the OBCs did not feel the same level of deprivation that the SCs did. Therefore, the framers of the Constitution rightly took into account the entire diversity of India’s social empowerment movement. Now, if, for inclusive growth, you also want to take into account the economic deprivation of many of these communities, the poor, the marginalised—that has been done. That’s why the whole comparison is meaningless, whoever does it. And can they use this argument to prevent Parliament from making laws on a particular subject? Parliament represents the collective will of the people. No one else brought this, the Narendra Modi government did. They felt the need and everyone supported it [in Parliament, when the Constitutional Amendment was tabled],
Why , What then did the government see as discrimination or the underlying social reason for the economic backwardness of this class?
a ,
Discrimination is one aspect of it. In so far as the special provisions are concerned, [the Constitution] Says, nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the socially educationally backward classes of citizens or the SCs and STs. Hence, differentiation is not mentioned here. What has been mentioned is the argument for equality of opportunity. Pleas for non-discrimination against women, religions, but special provisions have to be made for STs and SCs and socio-economically and educationally backward classes. that [the comparison] It will be unfortunate because SC is different, ST is different, OBC is different. With the passage of time, shall we not see standards developed for benchmarking reservation so that it does not become a monopoly of a few? So, income, social status, landed property – all these things have been benchmarked, especially for OBCs, and that is a good thing. So, let it grow. And this development should be allowed to go on unhindered with clear parliamentary intervention from time to time.
Why , Another aspect has been that by the nature of relaxation in EWS quota, it is essentially a forward caste reservation. How do you answer this argument?
a ,
I would say this is argument for argument’s sake without any logic or basis. When the amendment itself says economically weaker sections, which will be defined by the state on the basis of income and other parameters, then how? So this whole argument is completely wrong. And I said at the outset that the existing reservation rights have not even been touched. What is the Current Status? 27% backward, 15% SC, 7.5% ST and 4% who are with benchmark disabilities. Now, this (EWS) is a new addition to the fundamental rights itself in the constitutionally prescribed manner of constitutional amendment under Article 368. This fact is very, very important.
Why , So where to from here? Is the government expecting that the need for caste-based reservation will gradually reduce, now that the economic criteria have been opened up?
a ,
Even today SC and ST boys do well in merit or not? And I am very happy that a large number of reserved category people are shining in merit. I can tell you that like FICCI there is an organization called DICCI – Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce. And what’s there – only Dalit entrepreneurs with a turnover of ₹50 crore or more will be members. They are doing very well. I support him a lot. And their theme is, we don’t ask for employment, we give employment. As a former IT minister, I certainly know how many boys and girls from the so-called reserved category, especially the OBCs in the case of the Scheduled Castes, are doing so well as startups. Giving jobs. Technology, entrepreneurship, meritocracy, all these three are surely changing the whole profile of reservation. And we should welcome it. Therefore, let this momentum of growth of India’s enterprise, entrepreneurship and creativity continue unhindered without restricting or removing the existing reservations for these groups, which is a completely valid constitutional requirement.