Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS(EQUALITY) ART 14 TO 18 (ART 14: Equality before Law…

- - - - BUT
        WHY
        SPECIAL TREATMENT LIKE RESERVATION EXIST?
        
        BECAUSE EQUALITY ALSO MEANS EQUITY
        FOR EG
    - - RULE OF LAW CONCEPT
        
        GIVEN BY AV. DICEY
        
        IT MEANT 3 THINGS
        
        1.Absence of arbitrary power, : no man to punished except for a breach of law.
        
        Equality before the law
        
        The primacy of the rights of the individual: not of cons.
  - - - NO TWO PERSONS WITH DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL BE TREATED EQUALLY
    - - BUT SUCH DISTINCTION SHALL BE REASONABLE: SUBJECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW
  - - - IN CRIMINAL DOMAIN
      - IN CIVIL DOMAINS NOT BEFORE A 2 MONTH NOTICE
    - - PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILAGE OF MP AND MLA(RESP.)
        
        NO LIABILITY IN ANY COURT OF ANY THING SAID AND VOTE DONE IN HOUSE
    - - NO LEGAL PROCEDING ON PUBLICATION OF TRUE REPORT
    - - EXCEPTION OF ART 14 AND 19 FOR IMPLIMENTATION OF 39(b) and 39(c)
- - - - PROTECTION FROM STATE
  - - - PROTECTION FROM SOCIETY
  - - - POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN
        FOR EG:
        
        JUVENILLE JUSTICE ACT
        
        RESERVATION OF WOMEN IN LOCAL BODIES
    - - The state CAN make any special provision for the advancement ANY SEBC , SC , ST
        
        ADDED BY 1ST CONSAA (TO FULFILL DPSP)
        
        ANY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: FOR EG RESERVATION
        
        EXCEPTION : CREAMY LAYER FOR OBC
    - - State can make special provision for SEBC, SC, ST
        FOR admission to educational institutions including private educational
        institutions,
        
        ADDED BY 93RD CONSAA
        
        EXCEPTION : CREAMY LAYER FOR OBC AND MINORITY INS.
- - - - 1ST CONSAA TO IMPLEMENT
        ART 46 FOR WELAFRE OF SC AND ST
      - POONA PACT B/W MK GANDHI AND BR AMBEDKAR 1932
    - - RESERVATION IS STRONGEST FORM OF AFFRIMATIVE ACTION
    - - In 1979, the Morarji Desai GOVT. APPOINTED 2ND Backward Classes Commission HEADED BY BP MANDAL (AS PER ART 340)
        
        WHICH RECOMMENDED 27% QUOTA FOR OBC
      - IN 1991 VP SINGH GOVT. IMPLEMENTED THIS RECOMMENDATION
        
        NARSHIMA RAO MADE SOME CHANGES TO THIS RESERVATION POLICY
        
        CHALLENGED IN MANDAL COMMISSION CASE
      - SC HELD FOLLOWING IN MANDAL COMMISSION CASE( INDRA SAWHNEY )1992
        FOR EXTENT OF ART 16(4)
        
        CREAMY LAYER CONCEPT
        
        50% CEILING ON RESERVATION IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
        
        NO RESERVATION IN PROMOTIONS
        
        RESERVATIONS IN PROMOTIONS
        
        GOVT. RESONSE
        GOVT. CAME UP WITH
        77 TH CONSAA
        
        TO ADD ART 16(4 ) WHICH PROVIDE RESERVATION IN PROMOTIONS ALSO
        
        SC IN AJIT SINGH CASE
        
        HELD THAT RESERVATION IN PROMOTION IS ALLOWED WITH CATCH UP RULE
        
        GOVT RESPONSE:GOVT. CAME UP WITH
        85TH CONSAA
        
        THAT PROVIDED RESERVATION IN PROMOTION WITH CONSEQUNTIAL SENIORITY (ART 16 (4A))
        
        CHALLENGED IN M. NAGRAJ CASE IN 2006
        
        SC UPHELD THE VALIDITY OF AMENDMENT BUT HELD THAT
        
        FOR THIS ADEQUATE DATA TO BE PROVIDE QUANTIFIABLE DATA THAT MEMBERS ARE NOT ADEQUATELY REPRESENTED
        
        ALSO SUCH DECISION SHOULD NOT HAMPER ART 335(CLAIMS OF RESERVATION SHOULD ALSO KEEP IN MIND )
        
        CARRY FORWARD RULE SHOULD NOT VIOLATE 50% LIMIT
        
        REMOVED BY 81ST CONSAA
        ADDED ART 16(4B) IN CONS
    - - as it provided for 69 per cent of reservation, far exceeding the 50 % CEILING