SC: What is basis of fixing income limit of ₹8L for EWS category?

QUESTIONS APPLICATION OF SAME INCOME CRITERIA

SC: What is basis of fixing income limit of ₹8L for EWS category?

AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com

New Delhi  08.10.2021

: Questioning the Centre on the basis for fixing an annual income limit of ₹8 lakh for the economically weaker sections (EWS) category, which is the same for determining the creamy layer for OBCs, the Supreme Court on Thursday asked if it had conducted a study or exercise before taking the decision.

A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and B V Nagarathna, which is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Centre’s decision to implement OBC and EWS reservation in the All India Quota for medical admission, raised the question on how the same income criteria could be applied across the country. How can a person’s earning in a small town or village be equated with those earning the same income in a metro city, it asked. The petition said per capita income of states are different and applying the same criteria may not be reasonable as the bar should be linked with cost of living or per capita income.

“What is the basis of fixing of ₹8 lakh criteria? Whether there was any study done before taking the decision. You have to demonstrate on what was the data or statistics on the basis of which it was done,” the bench said. It said even House Rent Allowance given to a government employee is not same and depends on place of posting and suggested that income criteria for EWS reservation should be linked to cost of living of a place instead of making it uniform across the country.

It said the income limit fixed for the OBC category for determining creamy lawyer could not be mechanically implemented in the EWS category as well. It said that there was no concept of social backwardness for the EWS category who are from forward classes and the creamy layer criteria for the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes may not be an automatic fit.

Senior advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for the petitioners, contended that a scientific system needs to be adopted by the government while determining economically weaker sections. His view was supported by senior counsel Shyam Divan who was appearing for a group of MBBS doctors who approached the court against the Centre’s decision.

Full report on www.toi.in