{"id":13789,"date":"2022-06-21T15:46:26","date_gmt":"2022-06-21T10:16:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aapkaconsultant.com\/blog\/?p=13789"},"modified":"2022-06-21T15:46:27","modified_gmt":"2022-06-21T10:16:27","slug":"reservation-is-not-a-fundamental-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thelegalshots.com\/blog\/reservation-is-not-a-fundamental-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Reservation is not a fundamental right<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Introduction<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The caste system in India started with the advent of Aryans. They introduced the concept of purity, wherein they considered people with a dark complexion inferior. The caste system became deep-rooted and differences in upper and lower castes widened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After independence, India decided to become a democracy. It guaranteed civil and political liberties to everyone. This included the right to equality, the right to vote, the right to freedom, etc. irrespective of caste. The aim was the upliftment of backward sections of society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ambedkar spearheaded the fight for reservation first in electoral seats during provincial elections. He wanted reservations in government employment, educational institutions, and every possible sphere. However, surprisingly, reservation is not a fundamental right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s explore this field through landmark judgments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reservation<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Educational institutions<\/p>\n\n\n\n

State of Madras vs. Champakaran Dorairajan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Madras government, by order, reserved seats in government colleges. The government did so according to the numerical strength of students getting admission. The Supreme Court struck it down as it was violative of Article 15 (1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nhttps:\/\/youtu.be\/XvZ3bzc9bF4\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

1st<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It inserted Clause (4) into Article 15 of the Constitution in 1951. Special provisions for the advancement of backward classes made a way for reservations in educational institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

TM Pai Foundation vs. UOI and PA Inamdar vs. the State of Maharashtra<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SC stated that the state cannot make reservations in private educational institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

93rd<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It inserted Clause (5) into Article 15 in 2005. This enabled the states to include private institutions under the reservation policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Promotions<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indra Sawhney v UOI<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court did not grant reservations in promotions to SC\/ST. It also included OBC in the reservation, excluding the creamy layer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

77th<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government introduced Article 16 (4A), allowing states to provide reservations for SC\/ST for promotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ajit Singh vs. State of Punjab<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Catch up rule<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This would promote Reserved category employees faster as compared to their general counterparts. So a junior SC\/ST promoted earlier, became senior to the general employee. SC held that if the promotion of general employees happens after SC\/ST employees, will regain seniority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

81st<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Carry Forward Rule<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government introduced Article 16 (4B), allowing the state to carry forward unfilled vacancies from the previous year. This breached the ceiling of 50%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

82nd<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Proviso to Article 355<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article is about maintaining administrative efficiency while reserving seats. However, the state could negate it by relaxing qualifying marks for reservation for promotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

85th<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consequential Seniority<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Carry Forward rule ended. The new rule promoted a junior SC\/ST employee earlier and general employee later them. But a general employee will not become senior after his promotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

M. Nagraj vs. UOI<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Petitioner challenged the previous 4 amendments in SC, but it upheld every amendment. SC allowed reservations for promotion, but with 3 conditions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n