The Supreme Court yesterday upheld the validity of the 103rd constitutional amendment that provides 10 percent reservation in admissions and government jobs to economically weaker sections.

The five-judge bench had a 3:2 split verdict and four different judgements. Leading English newspapers today spilled over with editorials on the verdict.

The Hindu said a sole income criterion is “questionable” and must be “non-exclusionary”. It suggested the government “ consider both opening up the EWS quota to all communities and keeping the income criterion much lower than the ceiling, perhaps at the same level as the income tax slab, to identify the ‘creamy layer’ so that some poorer sections of communities, if they are crowded out on the OBC or SC/ST merit list, could still avail of some residual benefits under the EWS scheme.”

The Times of India said the EWS quota was “welcome” and the Supreme Court had provided a “stamp of legitimacy” to economic reservation. But it cautioned that the “sharp disagreement between the minority and majority judgements on the question of 50% cap may have set the stage for future controversies”.

“The exclusion of OBCs, SCs and STs from the EWS quota was politically deemed necessary because GoI had sensed considerable heartburn among unreserved groups,” TOI said. “...But another kind of politics can start following the EWS ruling and as the poll schedule gets busier.”

The Indian Express was more explicit, warning that the EWS quota “is of a piece with the Centre’s attempt to fashion a new welfare architecture by reading class with caste”. 

“The government must engage with the concerns flagged in the dissenting judgement and address the fears of Dalits as well as socially and educationally backward classes,” the editorial said. “...While the step to include poverty as a cause of discrimination and to propose redress is welcome, expanding the economic pie remains the principal imperative.”

Hindustan Times, in an editorial headlined “EWS ruling will shape quota law”, said the verdict was a “pivotal decision” that “breaks from precedents and past definitions of backwardness that always pivoted on socioeconomic conditions and histories of oppression”.

It continued: “...with the EWS quota in place, an overwhelming majority of the country is now eligible for one form or other of reservation. It will be interesting to see whether this expansion changes the politics around reservation, especially the vocal opposition of upper caste groups and the now debunked link between quotas and merit.”

Finally, the Telegraph’s editorial said the EWS quota is “heartening” but “leaves some discomfort in its wake” since it’s “decidedly not for those who come under other reservations umbrellas”.

“No doubt the upper caste majoritarian community would be grateful, now that 2024 looms,” it said. “The huge non-upper caste population may be less entranced. The poorer among them, who often find it difficult to access the fruits of reservations anyway, may perceive an additional advantage being officially given to the upper castes; Dalits in general may fail to appreciate the importance of an exclusionary pro-poor policy.”