Skip to main content

It is injustice to give the benefit of EWS only to the general category. How?

EWS (Economically Weaker Sections) Reservation, which provides 10% reservation to economically weaker individuals from the general category, is accused of being "unjust" on the following grounds:

1. Constitutional and Theoretical Disputes
* Deviation from the Principle of Social Justice: The Indian Constitution has historically based
reservation on social and educational backwardness (Articles 15-16), not solely on economic
status. EWS reservation, for the first time, granted privileges to the general category based on
economic criteria, which is seen as contrary to the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

* Objections in the Supreme Court: In the 2022 Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India case,
some judges argued that EWS reservation violates the "Right to Equality" (Article 14)
because it excludes the poor from SC/ST/OBC communities.

2. Exclusion of Poor from SC/ST/OBC
According to EWS reservation rules, individuals from SC/ST/OBC categories, no matter how poor,
cannot avail the benefits of this quota. This creates a "double disadvantage":
* Example: A Dalit family with an annual income of ₹2 lakh cannot benefit from EWS,
while a general category individual with an income of up to ₹8 lakh is eligible for the EWS quota.

* Data: According to the NSSO, the poverty rate among SC/ST communities (20-30%) is higher
than that of the general category (15-20%). Thus, the exclusion of poor SC/ST/OBC individuals
from EWS benefits is seen as discriminatory.

3. Issues with Economic Criteria
* Income Limit of ₹8 Lakh: This limit for EWS is the same as the "creamy layer" threshold
for OBCs, which is considered unrealistic and high. In urban areas, an individual earning ₹8 lakh
is not considered "poor," while in rural areas, this income might be sufficient.

* Property Criteria: Only those with less than 5 acres of land or a house smaller than 1000
square feet are eligible for EWS. This criterion ignores urban-rural disparities.

* Unequal Distribution: For economic-based reservation, it is essential to consider the overall
family condition (e.g., health, education, debt) rather than just individual income, which is
not addressed in EWS.

4. Political Agenda and Neglect of Social Justice
* Ignoring Social Backwardness: EWS reservation assumes that poor individuals from the general
category only need economic support, while SC/ST/OBC communities have faced centuries of caste-based
oppression and structural inequality.

* Purpose of Reservation: The original reservation was meant for empowerment, while EWS has
become a tool for "poverty alleviation," limited to government jobs.

* Political Benefit: EWS is seen as a populist move to appeal to the "upper-caste vote bank,"
rather than a measure designed with social justice in mind.

5. Alternative Solutions: What Could Have Been Done?
Universal Economic Reservation: If EWS had been extended to the poor from
all categories (including SC/ST/OBC), it would have been more equitable.

Multidimensional Poverty Index Instead of Income: Poverty should be measured based on factors
like health, education, housing, and debt.

Coordination with Existing Reservation: Economic weaker sections within SC/ST/OBC quotas could
have been prioritized to prevent the "creamy layer" from benefiting disproportionately.

Conclusion: Why "Unjust"?
EWS reservation is considered unjust because:
1. It weakens the principle of social justice.
2. It subjects poor SC/ST/OBC individuals to a double disadvantage.
3. Its economic criteria are impractical and inadequate.
4. It appears to be politically motivated rather than aimed at equality.

Solution:
Reservation policies should be designed on a combined basis of social and economic backwardness
to ensure justice for disadvantaged groups as well as the poor from all categories.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

GDS Is Permanent Job Or, Not ?

GDS Job Nature and Employment Structure Explained  The position of Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) in India's postal department is not a permanent job.   Here's a breakdown of its employment structure:  1. Contractual Nature : GDS roles are part-time, contractual engagements typically offered for 3 years, renewable based on performance and operational needs. They are governed by the Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, not the standard government service rules.  2. Job Security: While the role is under the government (India Post), it lacks the permanency of regular civil service positions. However, the contractual renewal system often provides stability if performance and conduct meet requirements.  3. Benefits: GDS employees receive fixed allowances (not a regular salary) and limited benefits like paid leave, maternity leave, and access to the National Pension System (NPS). They do not receive traditional government perks like pensions,...
Post a Comment
Read more

To Transition From A GDS Dak Sevak To PA In India Post.

To transition from a GDS Dak Sevak to a Postal Assistant (PA) in India Post. Follow this structured approach : 1. Understand Recruitment Channels: * SSC CHSL Exam: - The Staff Selection Commission (SSC) Combined Higher Secondary Level (CHSL) exam is the primary route for direct recruitment to PA roles. - Eligibility: 12th pass, age 18–27 years (relaxations apply for reserved categories). - Exam Pattern: Tier 1 (Objective: GK, Math, English, Reasoning), Tier 2 (Descriptive), and Tier 3 (Skill Test). - Application: Monitor [ssc.nic.in](https://ssc.nic.in) for notifications. * Internal Promotion: - Check India Post’s departmental exams or seniority-based promotions. A percentage of PA vacancies may be reserved for internal candidates. - Inquire with your circle office or HR for internal notifications. 2. Preparation Strategy: Syllabus Focus: - General Knowledge: Current affairs, Indian geography, history. - English: Grammar, comprehension, vocabulary. - Mathemati...
Post a Comment
Read more