Reservation is only meant to remedy the historical injustices and is not a poverty alleviation programme, said Senior Advocate P Wilson, appearing for petitioners challenging the Centre’s decision to grant a 10% quota to economically weaker sections category in admissions and jobs, reported Bar and Bench.
“The structural barriers have to be seen, they [vulnerable section of society] were kept away from mainstream for generations after generations,” Wilson told the Supreme Court.
A five-judge Constitution bench is hearing petitions that have challenged the 103rd amendment to the Constitution, which introduced changes to Articles 15 and 16 that deal with the right to equality and provide the basis for reservations.
At an earlier hearing on Tuesday, Advocate Mohan Gopal, representing a group of petitioners, had told the Supreme Court that the 103rd amendment is a “fraud on the Constitution”.
“This amendment is being seen as an instrument to protect the privileged rather than safeguarding the marginalised,” he had told the court.
At Thursday’s hearing, Wilson argued that reservation just for economic consideration violates the basic structure of the Constitution.
“It destroys the identity of the Constitution and the Parliament has travelled in a forbidden area by invoking Article 368 [power of Parliament to amend the Constitution] by brute majority and trampled the…
