The Legal and Constitutional Debate Over Exceeding the 50% Reservation Cap
This explainer examines the ongoing debate regarding the 50% ceiling on reservations in India. While the Indra Sawhney case (1992) established this limit to balance equality of opportunity with affirmative action, several states are pushing for higher quotas based on population data. The article explores Articles 15 and 16, which guarantee equality and allow for special provisions for backward classes. It also discusses the EWS reservation, which was upheld by the Supreme Court despite exceeding the 50% limit, and the recent debate over sub-categorization within SC/ST groups to ensure benefits reach the most marginalized.
Key Points
- Articles 15 and 16 provide the constitutional basis for reservations in education and public employment.
- The 50% cap was established in the Indra Sawhney (Mandal) case but is not an absolute constitutional limit.
- The 103rd Constitutional Amendment introduced 10% EWS reservation, pushing the total beyond 50% in many states.
- Sub-categorization is being considered to address the 'creamy layer' and ensure equitable distribution of benefits among sub-castes.
Exam Facts
- Indra Sawhney Case (1992)
- 103rd Constitutional Amendment (EWS)
- Articles 15(4), 15(5), 16(4)
- Balaji vs State of Mysore (1962)
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.