UPPSC 2025

DAILY
CLASS NOTES
Polity

Lecture – 09
Fundamental Right -3
 Fundamental Right -3
Article 14 (Equality before law or Equal Protection of Laws):
❖ The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection
of the laws within the territory of India.
❖ The idea of 'equality before law' comes from Britain, while 'equal protection of
laws' is from the American Constitution.
Exceptions to Equality Before Law:
Immunities of President and Governors (Article 361):
❖ The President and Governors are not answerable to any court for the exercise of their powers and duties.
❖ No criminal proceedings can be initiated against them during their term of office.
❖ Courts cannot issue processes for their arrest or imprisonment during their tenure.
❖ Civil proceedings against them, regarding personal acts, cannot be instituted until two months after notice is
delivered.
Article 15 (Prohibition of Discrimination on Certain Grounds):
❖ Article 15 (1): The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste,
sex, place of birth or any of them.
❖ Article 15 (2): No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be
subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to-
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly by
State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
❖ Article 15 (3): Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women
and children.
❖ Article 15(4): The First Amendment to the Constitution in 1951 introduced Article 15(4), allowing the
state to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, as well
as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, including reservations in jobs and educational institutions.
❖ Article 15 (5): The Constitutional 93rd Amendment in 2005 added clause (5) to Article 15. Nothing in
this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special
provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for
the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission
to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the
State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30.
❖ Article 15(6): Article 15(6), added by the 103rd Amendment Act of 2019. Nothing in this article or sub-
clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 or clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making,—
a. any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than
the classes mentioned in above clauses (4) and (5); and
b. any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the
classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5) in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to
educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the
 State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30, which in
the case of reservation would be in addition to the existing reservations and subject to a maximum of ten
percent of the total seats in each category.

Formation of Backward Classes Commissions:

❖ The first Backward Classes Commission was appointed in 1953 under the chairmanship of Kaka Kalelkar.
It submitted its report in 1955.
❖ The Second Backward Classes Commission was appointed in 1979 under the chairmanship of B.P.
Mandal, and submitted its report in 1980.
Indra Sawhney Case, 1992:
❖ The Supreme Court upheld a 27% quota for backward classes but struck down a government notification
reserving 10% of government jobs for economically backward classes among higher castes.
❖ The Court also ruled that the total reservation beneficiaries should not exceed 50% of India's population and
introduced the concept of the "creamy layer". It refers to the relatively affluent or socially advanced sections
within backward classes who are not eligible for reservation benefits.

Article 16 (Equality of Opportunity in Public Employment):

❖ Article 16 (1): There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or
appointment to any office under the State.
❖ Article 16 (2): No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence
or any of them, be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the
State.
❖ Article 16(4): Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of
appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not
adequately represented in the services under the State.
❖ M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006): The Supreme Court held that the State must collect quantifiable data
to justify reservations for SCs and STs. The creamy layer concept also applies to SCs and STs.
❖ 77th Amendment Act (1995): This amendment added a new provision in Article 16 (4A), empowering the
State to provide reservation in promotions for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in
state services if they are not adequately represented.
❖ The 81st Amendment Act of 2000 allows the state to treat unfilled reserved vacancies as a separate class of
vacancies to be filled in succeeding years, ending the 50% ceiling on reservation in backlog vacancies.
❖ Clause (6) was added to Article 16 by the 103rd Amendment Act, 2019, which came into effect on January
14, 2019, and empowers the State to make various provisions for reservation in appointments of members of
the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) of society to government posts. However, these provisions must be
within the 10% ceiling, in addition to the existing reservations.
❖ Jarnail Singh vs Union of India (2018) case: The Supreme Court changed its earlier decision regarding data
collection for reservations. States were no longer required to gather specific data to prove the backwardness
of SC/ST communities before implementing reservation quotas for promotions.
Supreme Court Judgment on Scheduled Castes Sub-Classifications (August 1, 2024):
❖ Permits Sub-Classifications: The Supreme Court's 7-judge bench ruled that states can now create sub-
categories within Scheduled Castes (SCs) to offer separate quotas for groups that are more backward within
the SC category.
❖ This ruling overturns the previous E.V. Chinnaiah judgment from 2005, which had said that SCs should be
treated as a single homogeneous group.
❖ Controversial Comments on Creamy Layer: In the majority opinion, four judges made controversial
remarks about the “creamy layer” within the SCs, which is a term used to describe more privileged
individuals within the SC communities who may not need the same level of reservation benefits.


 1

UPPSC 2025
Polity DMP–08

Fundamental Right-3 – Practice Questions

1. "In the context of the Indian Constitution, how does the concept of reservation in public employment
challenge the balance between social justice and the right to equality?"
(08 Marks, 125 Words)
How to approach the question:
❖ Introduction: Briefly introduce why reservation is important in 20-30 words.
❖ Body: Discuss how the concept of reservation in public employment challenges the balance between
social justice and the right to equality in 130-140 words.
❖ Conclusion: Conclude your answer in 20-30 words.
Answer:
Reservation is important to provide equal opportunities to socially and economically backward classes. It is
an attempt to bring into the mainstream those classes which have historically been victims of discrimination
and social injustice. Reservation ensures equality in education, employment, and political representation,
thereby promoting inclusive growth and social justice.
However, it also presents challenges in balancing this goal with the principle of the right to equality.
Objective of Reservation in Public Employment:
❖ The reservation policy aims to uplift socially and educationally backward sections of society by ensuring
their adequate representation in public employment.
❖ It is enshrined under Articles 16(4), and 16(4A) of the Constitution.
Balancing Social Justice and Equality: Ensuring Representation for Marginalized Groups:
❖ The reservation policy aims to uplift communities historically denied equal access to education,
employment, and resources.
❖ Article 16(4) allows the State to make provisions for reserving appointments or posts for any backward
class of citizens who are not adequately represented in State services.
❖ 77th Amendment Act (1995): Added a new provision in Article 16 (4A), empowering the State to
provide reservation in promotions for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in state
services if they are not adequately represented.
Social Justice vs. Right to Equality:
❖ Social Justice: Reservation promotes equality of opportunity by addressing systemic disadvantages
and historical discrimination faced by certain communities.
❖ Right to Equality: Critics argue that reservation can conflict with Article 14 (Right to Equality) and
Article 16(1) (Equality of Opportunity in Public Employment), as it differentiates based on caste,
potentially leading to reverse discrimination.
 2

Judicial Interpretation:
❖ 103rd Amendment Act (2019): Added Article 16(6), enabling up to 10% reservation for Economically
Weaker Sections (EWS) in addition to existing reservations, broadening the scope of affirmative action.
❖ Supreme Court Judgment on SC Sub-Classifications (2024): The Court permitted states to create
sub-categories within SCs for more precise quotas for particularly backward groups.
Conclusion :
The balance between social justice and equality remains complex, as both are fundamental to the Indian
Constitution. Reservation is essential for promoting social justice, but it must be carefully calibrated to ensure
that it does not excessively dilute merit and administrative efficiency. Moving forward, periodic reviews
and a more nuanced approach that considers both social and economic backwardness are key to sustaining
this balance.
