Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

103RD CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT, 2019 [DECODED] PART 1 (WHAT IS NATURE…

- - - - WHO IS EWS?
        
        AS NOTIFIED BY GOVERNMENT, PERSON/HOUSEHOLD
        
        EARNING LESS THAN 8 LAKH PER YEAR.
        
        HAVING LESS THAN 5 ACRE OF LAND.
        
        HAVING LESS THAN 1000 SQ. FEET OF HOUSE.
    - - 103RD CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT ADDS 10% TO ALREADY 49.5% OF RESERVED SEATS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.
      - NOW THE NEW QUOTA BECOMES 59.5% (BREACHES OF 50% LIMIT SET IN INDRA SAUTHEY CASE 1992).
- - - - • WHAT IS EQUITY?
        
        EQUALITY V/S EQUITY
      - • WHY SHOULD STATE STRIVE TO EQUITY?
        
        BECAUSE ART-14 PROVIDES FOR EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW
        
        THAT IS : NO UNEQUALS TO BE TREATED EQUALLY
  - - - B/W GANDHI–AMBEDKAR.
  - - - HOWEVER IT IS CONTINUING EVEN TODAY
      - POLITICAL RESERVATION : (RESERVATION IN SEATS FROM PARLIAMENT AND STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY)
    - - ADDED BY BY 1ST CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT
    - - ADDED 15(4)
        :arrow_down:
        WHICH IS EXCEPTION ON U/A 15(1)
        :arrow_down:
        WHICH PROHIBITS STATE FROM MAKING ANY
        DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF CASTE, CREED, SEX, PLACE OF BIRTH ONLY
      - • WHY ACT 15(4) WAS ADDED TO CONSTITUTION EVEN IT VIOLATES ART 14 AND 15(1)
        
        BECAUSE OF ART-46 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION(DPSP)
        
        WHICH PLACES RESPONSIBILITY OF STATE TO WORK FOR EDUCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC INTEREST OF SC, ST AND OTHER WEAKER SECTIONS OF SOCIETY
        
        SO AS TO IMPLEMENT THIS DPSP PARLIAMENYT ADDED 15(4)
- - - - SC AND ST WERE GIVEN CERTAIN CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION AND RIGHTS
  - - - 1ST BACKWARD COMMISSION HEADED BY KAKA KALAKAR
    - - THIS WAS CHALLENGED IN SUPREME COURT IN LAND MARK → INDRA SWARAY CASE OR MANDAL CASE 1992
        
        JUDGMENT FOR RESERVATION SC HELD :-
        
        RESERVATION ON ECONOMIC BASIS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
        
        RESERVATION CAN NEVER EXCEED 50%.
        
        WHY?
        
        SUPREME COURT ART-15(4) AND 16(4) MUST IN BALANCE WITH ART-335 WHICH PROVIDE FOR WELFARE OF BACKWARD SECTION WHILE MAINTAINING ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY.
        
        GAVE CONCEPT OF CREAMY LAYER.
        
        RESERVATION IN PROMOTION FOR ONLY 5 YEARS → (DIFFERENT TOPIC)
        
        NO CARRY FORWARD RULE
        
        → REMOVED BY 81ST CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT
        
        PERMANENT STATUTORY BODY TO EXAMINE INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION OF OBC
        
        PARLIAMENT ESTD. NCBC IN 1993
        
        NOW REPLACED BY CONSTITUTIONAL BODY-ADDED BY 102ND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT ADDED ART-338 B.
  - - - 15% SC
        7.5% ST
        27% OBC
        10% EWS
        
        THIS IS VIOLATION OF 50% LIMIT SET BY SC IN INDRA SAWHAY CASE.
        
        { 59.5% TOTAL SEATS.}