The court upheld that Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) do not have a constitutional right to age and attempt relaxations in civil service examinations, distinguishing them from other reserved categories.

ORDER

(Reserved on : 24/02/2025 (Pronounced on : 17/03/2025 Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Vivek Jain.

The present petitions have been filed by the candidates belonging to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS Category) and challenge is made to various executive instructions issued by the Government of India and by the Government of M.P. so also consequential recruitment notices issued by the State Government of M.P. pursuant to 103^rd amendment to the Constitution of India whereby the provisions for granting reservations to Economically Weaker Sections of society as a separate class in itself was carved out in the Constitution. It is the case of the petitioners that in terms with the aforesaid articles 15(6) and 16(6) of the Constitution of India inserted by 103^rd amendment to the Constitution of India, though the State and Central Government have issued consequential executive instructions and have en- grafted the provision of reservation of seats for which no grievance is raised in the present petitions, but other relaxations and more particularly relaxation in the matter of number of attempts and age limit have not been extended to the members of EWS categories though the said relaxations are given to members of other categories of vertical reservation like Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (SC, ST and OBC for short). All the writ petitions involve similar grounds of attack and canvass similar relief for the petitioners and another question was also argued which was stated to be ancillary to the question involved in the present petitions, that the OBCs in the central list are being given 9 attempts in Civil Services Examination whereas OBCs in the State List are being given 6 attempts in Civil Services Examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission and in that matter also indulgence was sought stating that those State list OBCs, who are otherwise eligible to avail the EWS reservation for services under the Union, but are being deprived of 9 attempts though they will get 9 attempts if they are treated Central list OBCs and for this reason also, 9 attempts should be allowed for State list OBCs in UPSC examinations when they compete as EWS. This issue has been agitated only in W.P. No. 14695/2024 by the learned senior counsel in addition to issues raised in the matter of EWS reservation. Since all the petitions revolve on similar facts and similar grounds, they are being decided by this common judgment. The reference to the documents and pleadings is taken from W.P. No. 14695/2024.

2. Shri Kapil Sibbal, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that EWS is a separate class in itself as recognized by 103^rd amendment to the Constitution of India and once the persons belonging to other vertical reserved categories i.e. SC, ST and OBC are getting benefit in the matter of getting number of attempts, age relaxation, then there is no reason why such relaxation be not granted to the members of EWS categories who are also a class in itself and have also faced impediments in their life may be not on account of social and educational backwardness but on account of economic parameters, and those State list OBCs, who are otherwise not eligible for OBC reservation in Central services and therefore can avail EWS reservation, have faced social backwardness also. Therefore, there should be parity in the matter of grant of other concessions like number of attempts and age relaxation.

3. These contentions were buttressed by submissions advanced by Shri Rameshwar Thakur, learned senior counsel and other counsel in their respective cases. Challenge is made to the executive instructions dated 31.01.2019 (Annexure P/1) which is issued by the Government of India in the matter of providing reservation and other facilities to the members of EWS categories and in that executive instructions dated 31.01.2019 there is no provision for other concessions like age limit etc. The challenge is also made to F