CONSTITUTIONAL SCRUTINY OF THE 103^rd AMENDMENT: EXAMINING EWS RESERVATION AND THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE.

The 103rd Constitutional Amendment introduced a 10% reservation for economically weaker sections (EWS) among the general category, excluding Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). This move sparked debates over whether economic criteria alone could justify reservations and whether the exclusion of traditionally marginalized groups was constitutional. This paper critically examines the constitutionality of the EWS reservation, arguing that while economic backwardness deserves state protection, the exclusion of SCs, STs, and OBCs who meet the same economic criteria raises concerns about equal opportunity. The decision to restrict EWS benefits to the general category effectively denies economically disadvantaged SCs and STs additional support, potentially contradicting the principle of substantive equality. The paper also highlights the absence of updated empirical data, as the policy continues to rely on the 2011 Census, thereby questioning the precision of its implementation. While the Supreme Court has upheld the amendment, the debate surrounding its constitutional validity persists, necessitating a more nuanced approach to reservation policies that balance economic and social disadvantages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]