Tribune News Service
Satya Prakash
New Delhi, 20 January
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the 27 per cent quota for OBCs in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) All India Quota (AIQ) seats for admission to PG medical and dental courses in state colleges. Reservation was not against merit as it furthered distributive justice.
A bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud said that admission to NEET postgraduate courses for 2021 will be as per the existing reservation of 27 per cent for OBCs and 10 per cent for EWS. However, it said the challenge to the validity of the criteria for determining the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) quota would be heard and decided in the third week of March. The order comes on petitions challenging the reservation for OBC and EWS candidates offered by the Center in AIQ seats in state government-run medical colleges through a notification dated July 29, 2021.
High Scores Not Proxy for Qualifying
Higher marks in an exam are not proxy for merit. Qualification should be made socially relevant…. Reservation is not the opposite of merit, but carries forward its distributive consequences. ,Justice DY Chandrachud
“Ability cannot be reduced to narrow definitions of performance in an open competitive examination that provides only formal equality of opportunity. Competitive examinations assess basic current competency in order to allocate educational resources, but not an individual’s.” Excellence does not reflect abilities and potentials that are also shaped by live experiences, subsequent training, and personal character. Importantly, open competitive examinations do not reflect the social, economic and cultural advantage that certain classes accrue. and contributes to their success in such examinations,” it said.
“An antagonistic paradigm of merit and reservation serves to remove inequalities by eliminating inequalities”in the area of disability to reserved candidates, and to reduce their capabilities,” it noted.
“In our opinion, it cannot be said that the effect of backwardness vanishes simply because a candidate possesses a graduate qualification. In fact, a graduate qualification may provide some social and economic mobility, but it by itself does not create equality between forward classes and backward classes. In any case, where ineligible candidates are said to be benefited from reservation, over-inclusion cannot be claimed as OBC candidates falling in the creamy layer are excluded from availing the benefits of reservation. Thus, we find that there is no bar on introducing reservation for socially and educationally backward classes (or OBCs) in PG courses.
“Higher marks in an examination are not proxy for merit. Ability should be socially relevant and reimagined as a tool that advances social objects like equality that we value as a society. In such context, reservation is not contrary to merit, but carries forward its distributive consequences,” it said.
Observing that “marks in an examination are not the sole determinant of excellence or ability,” the bench observed, “even though, for the sake of argument, it is assumed that scores reflect excellence, it is not the only value which is considered A social good. We must look at the distributive consequences of merit. Accordingly, how we measure merit must also incorporate if it reduces or strengthens inequalities.”
The bench – which on January 7 passed a short order upholding the 27 per cent quota for OBCs in AIQ seats – has now given a detailed judgment stating the reasons for its decision.