DMPQ: What in Indra sawney case? Explain its provision and comment on its relevance. ( Polity)

by

Indra Sawhney case vs Union of India was a judgement came in 1992. It assess the amendment made in the article 16 of the constitution and the executive order of the Narsimha govt. to grant 10% reservation to economically weaker section. Article 16(4) was inserted which stated that state can make provisions for the backward classes which are not adequately represented in the services.

          The 9 judge bench gave the following judgements:

  1. It upheld the amendment made in the article 16(4) but put a constraint on state to put a ceiling of 50% on reservation. The 50% rule was given to endure balance between merit and affirmative actions in the form of reservation.
  2. It quashed the executive order of 10% of
    Join Our Telegram Channel
    42.9-11.4 132.3-11.4 132.3s0 89.4 11.4 132.3c6.3 23.7 24.8 41.5 48.3 47.8C117.2 448 288 448 288 448s170.8 0 213.4-11.5c23.5-6.3 42-24.2 48.3-47.8 11.4-42.9 11.4-132.3 11.4-132.3s0-89.4-11.4-132.3zm-317.5 213.5V175.2l142.7 81.2-142.7 81.2z"/> Subscribe on YouTube
reservation given to EWS.
  • It quashed the promotion policy on the basis of reservation.
  • Concept of creamy layer was given.
  • A permanent statutory body should be established to examine complaints of over-inclusion and under-inclusion in the list of OBCs.
  • The ‘carry forward rule’ in case of unfilled (backlog) vacancies is valid. But it should not violate 50% rule.
    • error: Content is protected !!
    Exit mobile version