Thread by @barandbench

#SupremeCourt Constitution Bench to shortly hear petitions challenging the 10% quota for the economically weaker sections (#EWS).

Sources indicate parties have not been able to arrive at consensus regarding the questions of law and the bench is expected to fine-tune them today

Sr Adv Gopal S: Nearly 55 issues were suggested and we have to tried to concise it down. #EWS

Sr Adv Gopal S: Many issues were in the form of arguments.

SG Tushar Mehta: There are issues framed by Learned Attorney General as well.

CJI: Yes we are looking at that

Sr Adv Gopal S: Whether the 103rd Constitution Amendment can be said to breach the basic structure of the Constitution by permitting the State to make special provisions, including reservation, based on economic criteria?

Gopal S: Whether the Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019 breaches the Equality Code which is a basic feature of the Constitution?

Justice R Bhat: All this falls under the umbrella ?

Gopal S: Yes

Gopal S: Whether the 103rd Constitution Amendment can be said to breach the basic structure of the Constitution in excluding the SEBCs/OBCs/SCs/STs from the scope of EWS reservation?

Justice Bhat: See again unbridled power etc we cannot have in issues as that would be an assumption

Gopal S: Yes equality code will be sufficient

Gopal S: then it is on creamy layer

AG: How is creamy coming here when we are on poorest of poor, EWS?

CJI: He has mostly collated all the suggestions..

SG: Yes both are diametrically opposite #Ews

Sr Adv P Wilson: Whether the 103rd Constitution Amendment Act, 2019 violates the basic structure of the Constitution inasmuch as it permits reservation of seats in educational institutions and employment under the State on the basis of economic criteria alone?

Wilson: Whether reservations, being exceptions to the rule of equality under Article 14 and non-discrimination under Article 15(1) & 16(1), is permissible only in favour of socially backward classes, SC & ST?

Wilson: 3. Whether granting reservations to forward castes (EWS or otherwise) is impermissible in view of the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court in Ashok Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008) 6 SCC 1

Wilson: 4. Whether granting reservations on the basis of economic criteria alone is permissible in view of the dictum laid down by this Hon’ble Court in the case of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India 1992 Supp (2) SCC 217?

Wilson: Whether the material basis of the judgement is Articles 14, 15(1) & 16(1) and the same have not been removed?

Wilson: 5. Can the impugned amendment breach the 50% cap on reservations placed by a catena of judgements of this Hon’ble Court, when the amendment is not placed in the IXth schedule?

Justice Bhat: How can a constitutional amendment be in 9th schedule ?

Bench discusses

Wilson: my other issues are: leave 9th schedule..

6. Whether the ‘EWS’ category is a reasonable classification? 7. Whether the impugned amendments fail the width of power and guided power tests laid down by this Hon’ble Court in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212?

Wilson: and lastly 8. Whether the States have been given unguided power to classify EWS category? #EWS

Judges discuss

Dr Gopal: We are crossing a Rubicon and it is the ADM Jabalpur of Social Justice and it reverses the theory that one is privileged by being born in upper class and that being born in lower class is a disability

Justice Bhat: we are on validity of 103rd amendment regard to the equality clause. What is the facet of equality being violated .. it has to be glaring. As Bheem singh judgment says that there must be something shocking which breaches the constitutional scheme #ews

CJI UU Lalit to Dr G Mohan Gopal: we are only marking our ground now. In the territory anything is possible. We just want to crystallise a few issues and then counsels can add flesh and blood to it. #ews

SG Mehta submits that the issues by AG Venugopal would suffice

CJI: Yes the first three issues by him are only enough #EWS

Sr Adv Sanjay Parikh draws attention of the court to the issues framed by him #EWS

CJI UU Lalit: The first three questions by AG encapsulate the entire case. Read the questions here: #EWS

A counsel speaks in Hindi:

CJI: Some of us do not understand the nuances of Hindi. English is the language of the court and let us adhere to it, though it is a colonial past. Thank you. #EWS

AG: let them serve the written submissions in advance to us which will enable us to reply better #EWS

CJI cautions counsels that no repetition of submission will be allowed. Interventions will be allowed only if they raise a point which is not argued #EWS

CJI: In keeping with suggestion made last time, learned counsels appearing for various parties submitted issues. The issues suggested by the AG are as follows:

CJI: Various facets of the matter are touched upon and suggested by other learned counsels. In an attempt to crystallise and capture every facet of issues so suggested by counsels

CJI: First 3 issues suggested by AG are the issues which arise in the matter. Other issues suggested are in the nature of submissions advancing one of the propositions emerging from issued suggested by AG.

CJI: We shall be going ahead with the hearing apropos the first 3 issues suggested by the AG. #ews

CJI: We shall be going ahead with the hearing apropos the first 3 issues suggested by the AG. #EWS

AG: After I complete the SG would also like to argue

CJI: Very well.

CJI: Intervenors be also allowed to file written submissions and they will be permitted to argue depending upon the written submissions perused by us. Idea is to not have repetition of submissions.

#ConstitutionBench rises