NEET Court Asks Centre Whether to Reconsider the 8 Lakh for EWS

Criterion for Determining EWS
Post Date:

The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre whether it would like to reconsider the annual income limit of Rs eight lakh prescribed for the purpose of determining the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category for reservation in NEET admissions for medical courses.

What the Top Court Clarified

The top court clarified that it was not coming under the purview of policy but was only trying to ascertain whether constitutional principles were followed. A bench of Justices D. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and B. Nagaratna got annoyed as no affidavit was filed by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and the Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT) and questions were framed by the Centre to be answered in a week.

Government Notification Fixing the Criterion of Eight Lakh Rupees:
The bench said, – Tell us whether you want to revisit the criteria or not. If you want us to perform our duties, we are ready to do so. We are creating questions that you have to answer. It said, “We may stay the Government notification setting the criteria of Rs.8 lakh for determination of EWS and you may continue to file the affidavit.

MCC Notice Providing Reservation

The top court was hearing petitions challenging the July 29 notices of the Center and the Medical Consultative Committee (MCC) which mandated 27 per cent for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and EWS category candidates in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET). 10 percent reservation was provided for) Admission to medical courses.

Fixing The Limit

The Exercise was Done Before Fixing The Limit:

    1. The top court once again asked Additional Solicitor General Natraj, appearing for the Centre, and asked whether any exercise was done before fixing the annual income ceiling of Rs 8 lakh for determining the EWS category.
    2. Whether the Major General (Retd) SR Singho Commission report of 2010 was considered before setting the criteria?
    3. The report of the commission should be placed on record before the court, the bench said. Major General (Retd) S. Singho Commission was constituted by the UPA government in 2010 and recommended welfare measures for the EWS category.
Factors Were also taken into Account
    1. Shri Natarajan said that the Commission’s report was one of the basis for setting the criteria but after that several deliberations took place and other factors were also taken into account.
    2. Fixing the norm of Rs 8 lakh is a pure policy matter and the court should not interfere in it. This decision was taken after proper use of the mind.”
    3. Mr. Natarajan said that the draft affidavit is ready by the concerned departments and they will file it in a day or two. The bench said that it is not going to tell the government what should be the limit whether it is Rs 4 lakh or Rs 6 lakh as it is for the executive to decide but it only wants to know what was the basis of it (8 lakh fixed as limit).
Explanation in the 103rd Constitution

The Bench Said that as per the Explanation in the 103rd Constitution:

    • a) It said, “You cannot just take Rs 8 lakh out of thin air and fix it as a criterion. There has to be some basis, some study. Tell us if there is any point in fixing the limit.” Demographic studies or data were taken into account. How did you arrive at this accurate figure? Can the Supreme Court scrap the criteria if no studies were done?
    • b) On October 7, the apex court had asked the Centre to investigate its decision to cap the annual income limit of Rs eight lakh to determine the EWS category for reservation in NEET admissions. The Centre had then said that fixing an annual income limit of Rs 8 lakh for the EWS category is a matter of policy based on the National Cost of Living Index.
    • c) The bench said that as per the clarification in the 103rd Constitutional Amendment that the norms for EWS will be notified by the state governments, then how can the Centre notify uniform EWS norms for the whole country. The top court then framed the question and asked the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and the DOPT to file their replies by October 28.