Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

ARTICLE 17 & 18 by ATRISHEKHAR - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Preventing anyone from entering or worshipping in any place of public w-orship;
      - • Using traditional, religious, philosophical, or other grounds to justify untouchability;
      - • Refusing entry to any store, hotel, or public entertainment venue;
      - • Insulting someone from a scheduled caste because of their untouchability;
      - • Refusing to admit people to public-benefit hospitals, educational institutions, or hostels;
      - • Directly or indirectly preaching untouchability; and
      - • Refusing to sell anything or provide services to anyone.
    - - Jail term plus fine.
      - Disqualification under Representation of Peoples' Act, 1951 contesting for elections at union and state level for the duration of sentence and fu rther for 6 years after release.
      - Article 35 – In entire fundament rights if any punishment is prescribed, then it can be given through section 35.
  - - - People are not viewed equally; they are separated due to the caste system.
    - - He said that we have a gradation of caste in the caste system, those at the top have uniform privileges and enjoy entitlements and the ones at the bottom have uniform disadvantages and have no entitlements and thus face a violation of their dignity.
        
        In Caste System the rights and privileges, advantages, and disadvantages are distributed in a graded manner, according to the location that the one occupies in the caste hierarchy.
        
        Therefore, Untouchabilty as exclusion from civic rights like housing, water, livelihood, marketplaces, wells, rivers, hospitals, temples, and many more are provided only to the privileged ones and are denied to others according to the graded society.
        
        On one hand, Gandhi used to say that nobody should be considered to be impure, nobody should be stigmatized but he also sees, merit in the caste system, he referred to the caste system as a scientific division of labor within society.
        
        But Ambedkar used to say that the problem is not just Untouchability, but the problem is the whole caste system, which brought up the problem of humiliation and stigmatization faced by people in form of Untouchability.
        
        According to Ambedkar, the caste system is not ritualistic but it has civic consequences, it has consequences on rights, dignity, and fraternity.
        Ambedkar said that the caste system and Hindu society are antithetic to the fraternity.
- - - - In Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India, 1996,the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the National Awards–Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Sri.
        
        It ruled that these awards do not amount to
        ‘titles’ within the meaning of Article 18 that prohibits only hereditary titles of nobility
        
        However, it also ruled that they should not be used assuffixes or prefixes to the names of awardees
        
        The equality theory does not rule out the possibility of recognising merit
        
        The fundamental duties of every Indian citizen are outlined in Article 51-A of the Constitution.
        
        The awarding of such a decoration was vigorously opposed by Acharya Kriplani, and it was removed by the Janta government in 1977, only to be reinstated by the Congress government in 1980.
      - • Bharat Ratna, public service of highest order (PM recommends this to the President, not more than 3 names per year)
      - • Padma Vibhushan, for distinguished and exceptional service
      - • Pad ma Bhushan, for distinguished service of higher order
      - • Padma Shri, for distinguished service in any field
    - - The guidelines contained in the communiqué from the Ministry of Home Affairs for the selection of potential recipients are extremely broad, imprecise, open to abuse, and wholly unsatisfactory for the important goal that they appear to achieve, according to the Court.
        
        In a separate but concurring judgement, Justice Kuldip Singh takes a scathing look at what he calls successive governments' "non-application of mind" in granting the "Padma Awards."
    - - The Judges made it clear that the committee should keep in mind the Court's concern that the number of awards should not be so numerous that their value is diluted.
        
        For the Padma awards, the Prime Minister constitutes the Pad ma awards committee headed by the Cabinet secretary, including the Home secretary, Secretary of President and 4-6 eminent persons.
    - - The Supreme Court ruled that it is only a distinction, not a title, and hence does not violate Article 18 of the Indian constitution.
        
        The groundwork for such a differentiation is laid down in Section 16 of the Advocate Act of 1961.