The affidavit said the reservation was necessitated as youths from economically weaker families of unreserved category were disappointed for not being provided enough opportunity.
The government filed its affidavit before a division bench of Chief Justice R Subhash Reddy and Justice V M Pancholi in response to a series of PILs challenging the ordinance.
Additional Secretary of the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, Kaluji Vanzara, said in the affidavit that Article 46 of the Constitution provides that the state shall promote education and economic interests of the weaker sections of society and the ordinance was meant for the same.
It stated that the Supreme Court's order providing 50 per cent ceiling for reservation as per the Indra Sawhney vs Union of India case as referred by the petitioners, is not being violated.
"The ordinance provides for classification among open category to the extent of 10 per cent, which is not reservation as per Articles 15 (4) and 16 (4) of the Constitution, meant for SC, ST and BC categories.