The Chhattisgarh detail is the most instructive part of this reply and the part most often missed. EWS reservation is enabled by a constitutional amendment, but Articles 15(6) and 16(6) are permissive rather than mandatory - they say the State 'may' make such provision. For reservation in State government posts and State educational institutions, the State must therefore legislate or notify, and Chhattisgarh's amendment Bill of 2022 has not been approved, so the policy is not in force there. That makes EWS unlike a fundamental right and very much like other reservation policy: a central constitutional enablement realised unevenly across States. The criteria themselves reward precision. Rs 8 lakh is the same figure used for the OBC creamy layer ceiling, which invites the assumption that the two categories are computed identically - they are not, since the components counted differ, and that is a distinction worth holding. The asset exclusions are the operative filter in practice, because they disqualify regardless of income and are far harder to misreport than income is. The 2022 judgment, decided 3:2 across four separate opinions, is a reminder that the majority was narrow and the reasoning contested - which is why questions on this topic tend to ask about the split rather than merely the outcome.