In another tweet, he clarified that he was not opposing the reservation.
Congress leader Udit Raj on Monday called the Supreme Court "casteist" after it delivered 3:2 split verdict on the validity of the Constitution's 103rd Amendment Act 2019, which provides for 10 per cent reservations of the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) in higher education and issues of public employment.
"Supreme Court is casteist, is there still doubt about it! It refused to give reservation to SC/ST, OBC in Indira Sawhney case citing the Constitution's limit of 50 per cent but reversed its statement when it came to EWS reservation," Congress leader Udit Raj said in his tweet in Hindi.
In another tweet, he clarified that he was not opposing the reservation of poor upper castes but was only mentioning the SC's vision in the matter of Indira Sawhney.
"I am not against the reservation of poor upper castes but of the mindset that when SC/ST/OBC matter came up, SC always said that 50% limit in Indira Sawhney case cannot be crossed," he wrote in his tweet.
Majority bench - Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela Trivedi and JB Pardiwala upheld the EWS amendment.
Justice Maheshwari said, "the EWS amendment does not violate the equality code or the essential features of the Constitution."
Justice Bela M Trivedi said, her judgment is in concurrence with Justice Maheshwari and said that the EWS quota in the general category is valid and constitutional.
CJI Lalit, Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela M Trivedi and JB Pardiwala passed the judgment upholding the Act.
In September last week, the constitution bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice S Ravindra Bhat, Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice JB Pardiwala, reserved the order after all the parties concluded their arguments.
The Constitution Bench was dealing with issues relating to the Constitutional validity of reservations on the basis of economic conditions. The court has begun hearing the matter on September 13 and the hearing was heard for seven days.
The constitutional validity of the 103rd Amendment Act, 2019 enabled the State to make reservations in higher education and matters of public employment on the basis of economic criteria alone. The Janhit Abhiyan petition is the lead matter.
Janhit Abhiyan's matter relates to the challenging constitutional validity of the 103rd Amendment Act, 2019 which enabled the State to make reservations in higher education and matters of public employment on the basis of economic criteria alone.
Moreover, the Janhit matter is being heard together with a case filed by the Andhra Pradesh government against the High Court's decision quashing its decision of granting reservations in education and public service for the entire Muslim population of the State in 2005.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)