In my opinion, nothing is more important for the Union of India than to implement this critical Article. I direct the Union of India to set a time-limit within which this Article is going to be completely implemented. In case the Union of India fails to fix the time-limit, then perhaps this work will also have to be done by the Court. The Union of India should appreciate in proper prospective that the root cause of social and educational backwardness is poverty.
All efforts have to be made to eradicate this fundamental problem.
Appearing on behalf of petitioners and respondents, the country's finest legal minds assisted us. The fundamental question that arises in these writ petitions is: Whether Article 15 (5), inserted by the 93rd Amendment, is consistent with the other provisions of the Constitution or whether its impact runs contrary to the Constitutional aim of achieving a casteless and classless society? Petitioners' argument, however, echoes the grave concern of our Constitution's original Framers. On careful analysis of the Constituent Assembly and the Parliamentary Debates, one thing is crystal clear: our leaders have always and unanimously proclaimed with one voice that our constitutional goal is to establish a casteless and classless society. It is our bounden duty and obligation to examine the validity of the 93rd Amendment in the background of the Preamble and the ultimate goal that runs through the pages of the Constitution. To attain an egalitarian society, we have to urgently remove socio-economic inequalities.
Mahatma Gandhi said: "The caste system as we know is an anachronism. All learned counsel for the petitioners asserted that we must deliver the benefits of reservation to only those who really deserve it.
The unfilled seats should revert to the general category. These issues first arise out of the text of the impugned Amendment.
Excluding the Creamy Layer from receiving special benefits: 13.
If the creamy get most of the benefit, why have reservations in the first place? Harish Salve, is justified in arguing that before carrying out Constitutional Amendments the Union of India must clearly target its beneficiaries.
He rightly submitted that we should not make law first and thereafter target the law's beneficiaries. 69, para 1.7.] We shall later review the Oversight Committee opinion in greater detail. The reasons for which the creamy layer should be excluded: 16.
The principle of creamy layer emanates from the broad doctrine of equality itself.
Unless the creamy layer is removed from admissions and service reservation, the benefits would not reach the group in whose name the impugned legislation was passed the poorest of the poor. Supreme Court applicable to our review of affirmative action under Art 15 (5) and similar provisions? With respect to OBC identification, was the Reservation Act's delegation of power to the Union Government excessive? Is the impugned legislation invalid as it fails to set a time-limit for caste-based reservation? At what point is a student no longer Educationally Backward and thus no longer eligible for special provisions under 15 (5) ? Would it be reasonable to balance OBC reservation with societal interests by instituting OBC cut-off marks that are slightly lower than that of the general category? I have carefully examined the pleadings and written submissions submitted at length.