- Why in news
- On 5 August 2026, the Minister of State for Social Justice told the Lok Sabha that EWS reservation rests on the 103rd Amendment and that no proposal to amend its provisions is under consideration.
- What it is
- The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019 allows up to 10% reservation for economically weaker sections outside SC, ST and SEBC categories. It added clauses to Articles 15 and 16. The Supreme Court upheld it in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022) by a 3:2 majority.
- Constitutional provisions
- The Act inserted Articles 15(6) and 16(6), allowing up to 10% reservation for EWS in education admissions and civil posts.
- Who is covered
- The quota is for economically weaker persons not covered by SC, ST or SEBC schemes.
- Judicial validation
- The Supreme Court upheld the amendment in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (November 2022) by a 3:2 majority.
Don’t confuse with Articles 15(4)/16(4) vs 15(6)/16(6): Articles 15(4) and 16(4) cover socially and educationally backward classes, SCs and STs. Articles 15(6) and 16(6) cover economic weakness among those left out.
Don’t confuse with Article 15(5) vs 15(6): Article 15(5) covers admission to private educational institutions for backward classes. Article 15(6) covers EWS.
Laws, judgments and statutory bodies: 30 Prelims questions since 2013 (what the law says, who chairs, legal basis). In Mains, 44 news-triggered questions, most in GS2, asking for provisions and challenges.
Why it matters
- Gives a quota route to poor families outside SC, ST and OBC groups.
- Introduced economic status as a basis for reservation in the Constitution, upheld by the Supreme Court.
Problems
- Critics say the ₹8 lakh limit is too high and close to the OBC creamy layer limit, so targeting is weak.
- Dispute over breaching the 50% ceiling and excluding SC, ST and OBC poor from the quota.
- Uneven state implementation, as seen in Chhattisgarh.
Way forward
- Review income and asset criteria with data so benefits reach the truly poor.
- Use periodic data, including a caste and socio-economic census, to guide reservation policy.
- Help states complete their legal steps for uniform implementation.
Put in your answer
Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022): A Constitution Bench upheld the 103rd Amendment by 3:2, ruling that the 50% ceiling is not inviolable.
- 2018Mains GS2 · Q2Can NCSC enforce SC reservation in religious minority institutions? Examine
- 2026Mains GS2 · Q2Discuss evolution of women's reservation from local bodies to Parliament, given class status
- 2024Mains GS1 · Q18Why underprivileged sections don't get full affirmative action benefits; comment
- 2023Prelims Q40Whether Article 16(4) reservation is limited by Article 335 efficiency of administration
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Prelims practice · Single answer
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements about reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in India: 1. The Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019 inserted Articles 15(6) and 16(6), enabling reservation of up to 10 per cent for EWS. 2. A family with gross annual income below ₹8 lakh is identified as EWS, provided it is not covered under the existing SC, ST or SEBC reservation schemes. 3. A family owning a residential plot of 200 square yards or more in a notified municipality is excluded from EWS. 4. The Supreme Court upheld the 103rd Amendment by a unanimous verdict in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022).
Which of the statements given above are correct?
True or false?
1 of 5
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.The Act enables EWS reservation of up to 10 per cent in admissions to educational institutions and in civil posts and services.
True. Up to 10% in education and civil posts.
2.A family owning five acres or more of agricultural land is excluded from EWS identification irrespective of income.
True. Five acres or more of agricultural land leads to exclusion.
3.A residential plot of 200 square yards or more in a notified municipality excludes a family from EWS.
False. In notified municipalities the limit is 100 square yards; 200 square yards applies outside them.
4.The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the 103rd Amendment by a unanimous verdict.
False. It was upheld by a 3:2 majority in Janhit Abhiyan (2022).
5.The EWS quota is meant for economically weaker persons not already covered by SC, ST or SEBC reservation.
True. Persons covered by SC, ST or SEBC schemes are outside EWS.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
Mains practice
15 marks · 250 words
The Government has told Parliament that no proposal is under consideration to amend the EWS reservation provisions introduced by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019. In this context, examine the constitutional provisions of the EWS quota and the issues raised by it, including the Supreme Court's verdict in Janhit Abhiyan (2022). Suggest a way forward.
Worth revising until Prelims 2028: most news questions come within two years of the event.