Justice DY Chandrachud led bench of #SupremeCourt to hear the challenge to 27% Reservation for OBC & 10% for EWS in All India Quota for PG Medical Courses #NEET@advocate_tanvi
Senior Adv Datar: counter has been filed and pleadings are complete.
Justice Chandrachud: How long will you take
Datar: 30 minutes to 45 minutes
SC: Let us take couple of small matters first
Criteria for reservations to AIQ seats a policy matter within govt domain: Centre tells #SupremeCourt.
Union submits that reservation in AIQ seats has already been implemented in the current academic year.
“The counselling commenced on 27.09.2021 and is likely to be completed by 10.11.2021."
Sr. Adv. Datar: This probably gives an explanation of where the 103rd amendment came from.
Datar further submits that while determining economically weaker sections, a scientific system needs to be adopted. Takes the Court through Indra Sawhney.
Sr. Adv. Datar: Because of the SC judgment that a reserved candidate who qualifies on merit can take a general seat. There is a Tamil Nadu Committee that states that students are suffering.
Sr. Adv. Datar: We are now dealing with PG admissions. Your Lordships have uniformly held that in PG admissions, there is no reservation. I’ll just quote two judgments.
"..that at the super speciality level in particular and even at the Post-Graduate level reservations of the kind known as protective discrimination in favour of those considered to be backward should be avoided as being not permissible." reads Datar.
#SupremeCourt: But what about the judgment in Abhay Nath case 2009 SCC 705, it is a three-judge bench.
They said that 50% includes reservation to SC ST students. Lets just see it..
Sr. Adv. Datar: This judgment also requires consideration, yes. We are now dealing with PG students, Lordships caveats an observation that at PG level there should be as less as possible.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: Just intercepting.. Subject to Your Lordships pleasure. We feel your Lordship should get assistance from all states. If you may consider issuing notice to all.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal: I fully endorse that.
Senior Advocate P. Wilson: It is clear that reservation is to be implemented this year. The Madras High Court judgment was confirmed by this Court so it should be this year.
#SupremeCourt: This is on OBC, you heard Mr. Datar he has only argued AIQ.
SG: My only request is that all State’s be allowed to make their submissions before 20th.. Then maybe each State can be allowed to argue for half an hour.
Justice Chandrachud: Okay, we’re just about 12 minutes from lunch, since both you & Mr. Sibal have made this weighty submission, we’ll deliberate over them.
In the meantime, we’ll allow Mr. Divan to introduce his arguments.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan: This Writ is directed with respect to the OBC reservation introduced in the AIQ.
The impact in my Petition is seen from the press note Mr. Datar referred to.
Sr. Adv. Divan reads out press note: My first point is, this entire 50% All India seats was a creation of this Hon'ble Court and we trace the genesis to the judgment in Pradeep Jain & Ors.
50% All India arose in the cotext of domicile requirements. This Court felt that there ought to be 50% seats available and this is how this norm came about, submits Divan.
Sr. Adv. Divan: There are subsequent judgments where there was a decrease in the 50% norm but this was reaffirmed in Saurabh Chaudhary (2003 11 SCC 146).
The Court concluded that domiciliary preference would be 50% and 50% would be all India.
Sr. Adv. Divan: The notice we have impugned is an executive order. This Court may have said this is coming on 29 July 2021, surely this can come next year.
These factors would have weighed if the govt. had approached the Court which I think is a min req.
Justice Chandrachud: So far as OBC reservation is concerned comes as a result of a direction of the Madras High Court that the Union implemented leading to the instant notification.
Sr. Adv. Divan: The notification ought to be tested on the legal norms set up by this Court. The evolution of law which has emphasised merit at the Post Graduate stage.
Even at the societal level, society requires doctors who have tremendous merit.
Sr. Adv. Divan: Having regard to 50%, the logic as we see it was to allow competition and recognising that Abhay Nath was to be considered as applicable law.
But cumulative impact was to be examined as well. This cannot be done by executive notification.
Sr. Adv. Divan: Here we are talking immediately of 2500 post graduate seats which were open and available! This is from the perspective of the Petitioner.
Adv Shrirang Choudhary: New scheme of SEBC reservation has come into place after the 102nd constitutional amendment. Govt is considering if there should be sub categorisation of OBCs. #SupremeCourt#NEET
Choudhary: SEBCs are now identified as mentioned in the presidential list. Rohini commission has recommended that OBC be subcategorised into four categories #SupremeCourt#NEET
Justice Chandrachud: If you see Article 342(1) .. as you have presidential list of SC ST..Now Article 342A is not a list which comes in conflict with All India Quota. AIQ students come from all over India.
Choudhary: There has to be revision of the SEBC list. In Mah there are around 1.5 lakh seats of engineering every year as compared to 76000 medical seats all across the country. Thus any reservation will hurt chances of meritorious students to get admission in govt colleges
Choudhary: Students will be forced to join private colleges which charge around 40 lakhs capitation fees #supremecourt#neet
Choudhary: Govt is committed to give due to reserved Category.. then what about general category ? #SupremeCourt#NEET
ASG KM Natraj: There are six factors which disentitles interim relief in this matter: 1) substantial argument is on permissibility of reservation.. all of that is before 5 judge bench. Thus entire issue has to be considered
SC: Is the reference to five judges reported ?
ASG shows a page number of filing 7
ASG: Contention with ref to Indira Sawhney was there and petitioner stated backward class cannot be determined only by economic criteria. This is before the 5 judge bench. #SupremeCourt
ASG: Interpreting Article 15 with respect to the plea here .. it will be desirable to hear the states before passing an order in this case. . #SupremeCourt
ASG: Till results are announced & eligibility is notified & till roster is not notified, petitioners case doesn’t stand. Reservation is notified before counselling. We are not at that stage at all and no point of changing rules of games #SupremeCourt#NEET
ASG: Changing rules of the game argument is untenable and without any basis. #SupremeCourt#NEET
ASG: seats provided to will be in addition to the seats reserved for reservation. 2019-20 itself centre has enhanced the number of seats. We could not give effect to this last year and the benefit went to general candidates and should have gone to those entitled under Ar 15(6)
Justice Nagarathna: Are you saying EWS is a separate class compared to OBC?
Justice Chandrachud: so existing was to SC ST OBC so this is in addition?
Justice Chandrachud: this 10% EWS cannot operate with SC ST or OBC. What is the meaning of not more than 10 percent in each category. Which categories are these ?
ASG: Suppose there are 500 seats where existing reservation is there we will create more seats more the EWS
ASG: No of seats can be increased and the particular category be included. That is the intent.
Justice Nath: So you are saying there will be 10 percent increase of seats in each category ?
Justice Chandrachud: EWS is not a horizontal reservation, it does not apply to obc, scst
ASG: So far as MDS is concerned for the all India Quota, the counselling has already begun and reservations are in place. It is there in all india Quota and already implemented so far as MDS is concerned #SupremeCourt
ASG: For central institutions , EWS was introduced in 2019 for UG and for PG in 2020
ASG: DoPT and social justice ministry has to file separate counter. But implementing reservations is a matter of policy. #SupremeCourt
Justice Chandrachud: what exercise did you do for reaching the 8 lakh figure. Or did you just list what is applicable to OBC?
ASG: these two departments have not been made party. I am not sure
DYC J: as per Indira Sawhney judgment someone who has breached 8 lac limit they are set to pass the social and economic backwardness due to economic advancement. But if they are below they fill the criteria of educationally and socially backwardness and economic backwardness
DYC J: Here we are dealing with pure economic backwardness. We have to know what exercise has Centre done ? Notification specifically adverts to 8 lacs. Now you have an OM of Jan 17 which combines 8 lacs with assets. Are you applying the asset cum income requirement ?
DYC J: If my child wants an EWS reservation when I am a tehsildar then what criteria am i fulfilling, economic , social or educational backwardness ?
DYC J: You just cant say it's a matter of policy when we are asking what is the basis of 8 lakhs for EWS eligibility?
ASG: There was deliberation and with proper noting it was approved by cabinet
SC : We are asking what was the study done ?
SC: You have to demonstrate the data before you and what was the contemporaneous study ?
ASG: I have to file a separate reply regarding this
DYC J: when we recommend members of bar to the bench there is a bench mark of income. Suppose a lawyer earns X may have a substantial practice but that may not be at par with a wealthy lawyer.
DYC J: You cannot say that requirement of 3 lacs in a B state will be EWS qualification for all India. Look at how the cost of practice, fees, and living differs in all states.
DYC J: Please reflect on the basis for the 8 lakh. What excercise has been done by centre to arrive at this. You cannot apply the same criteria as you apply to SEBC. For creamy layer it was to keep out the economically advanced ones.. you file an affidvait
DYC J: you can place any material that you may have
Datar: Office Memorandum was in Jan 17, 2019 and notification was in Jan 14. So unlikely any study was completed here and only adoption was done.
Supreme Court is hearing pleas challenging the rehabilitation policy including the eligibility criteria framed by the Municipal Corporation of Faridabad with respect to the demolitions at Khori Gaon #khorigaon
Haryana AAG Arun Bhardwaj : When matter was filed initially before Chandigarh HC, Aadhar was not their basis. A list of Documents are required for preparation of Aadhar card
SC: Bench: We were saying for grant of provisional allotment, go through whatever documents they have
Justice Khanwilkar: go through to show their residence, which will later be verified by you. Can’t that be done counsel?
AAG: to that extent it’s possible. We are not inclined to take it as a proof, that is our submission
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appears before a Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna on behalf of doctors appearing in the #NEETPG exam seeking uploading of answer key.
Sr. Adv. Sankaranarayanan: For some reason a completely different method has been adopted with us. We don’t get to keep our question paper, answer sheets or the answer key. All we get is the roll number with our score.
Counsel appears before #SupremeCourt Bench led by Justice Chandrachud seeking directions for the vaccination of 13 inmates of a home maintained in Ghaziabad.
It was submitted that the Petitioner is a registered Charitable trust and among its objected maintains a home for orphans, destitute widows, abandoned & aged.
The home presently provides shelter to 13 inmates, some suffering from dementia, old age ailments and some of them are wheel chair bound. Some of the inmates were stated to have Aadhar Cards while the rest were found abandoned on the street.
Justice Chandrachud: A PIL has been filed under Article 32. Specific issue canvassed is during covid pandemic patients had to take recourse to taking medical facilities in private hospitals due to dearth of public infrastructure. #supremcourt#covid19
Justice DY Chandrachud: There were instances of overcharging and hapless patients In the circumstances the petitioners have relied upon certain instances where local bodies such as Pune Municipal Corp had issued notice to private hospitals for overcharging patients.
Justice DY Chandrachud: Mandamus has been sought to set up a mechanism by central govgt to scrutinise bills of patients who believe they have been overcharged. This conerns a wide strata of society. Issue notice , returnable after 4 weeks.
Supreme Court hears a plea by Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private Schools with regard to access to technology by children who are attending online classes and funding needed for the same #supremecourt
Sr Adv Shyam Divan: this is not just about EWS students but about all. its a global problem, Under RTI Act there is no 100% compensation given to schools. burden gets transferred to fee paying students
Justice Chandrachud: we see our staff members who have children studied from one mobile phone. How many families can afford laptops? this is an important issue