Placeholder canvas
Thursday, September 28, 2023
HomeNationReview petition filed against Supreme Court judgment upholding Centre's decision on EWS

Review petition filed against Supreme Court judgment upholding Centre’s decision on EWS

- Advertisement -
Supreme Court Central Government Review Petition
Representative Image

A review petition has been filed in the Supreme Court against the judgment upholding the Centre’s decision on EWS issues by the Madhya Pradesh Congress leader.

The review plea has been filed by Jaya Thakur who is the General Secretary of MP Mahila Congress. In the petition, the petitioner has sought to review the order dated November 7, 2022.

The five-judge Constitution bench by a majority of 3:2 had upheld the validity of the Constitution’s 103rd Amendment Act which provides 10 percent EWS reservation in educational institutions and government jobs.

The Constitutional validity of the 103rd Amendment of the Constitution Act, 2019 was challenged before the top court and a five-judge bench decided on this issue by way of four separate judgments with different reasoning.

Three judgments upheld the 103rd Amendment of the Constitution Act, 2019 by passing the three different judgments with different reasoning. But one judgment passed by justice Ravindra Bhat along with the Chief Justice of India held that the 103rd Amendment of the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019 is to violate the basic structure of the Constitution on the ground of equality, especially the exclusion of the OBC/SC/ST.

Justice Ravindra Bhat’s view regarding the limitation of 50 pc is open because one of the constitutional amendments is still pending consideration and is still open.

The petitioner said that the impugned constitutional amendments are ultra vires as they alter the basic structure of the Constitution of India.

“In the present amendment, OBC/SC/ST are not entitled to take the benefits of the reservation. This is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India,” the petitioner said.

“Because the expression, `for any other sufficient reason in the clause has been given an expanded meaning and a decree or order passed under a misapprehension of the true state of circumstances has been held to be sufficient ground to exercise the power.”

The Court further held that the purpose of the review is the rectification of an order which stems from the fundamental principle that justice is above all. It is exercised only to correct the error which has occurred by some accident without any blame,” the plea said.

Therefore, the petitioner prayed to review the November 7, 2022 order passed by Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice J.B. Pardiwala.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -


Must Read

- Advertisement -

Related News