Anda di halaman 1dari 25





FY BBA LLB (2015-2016)

1 | Page




AND ARTICLE 14....14

2 | Page


Art. : Article
S.C & S.T : Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe
G.O. : Government Order
v. : Verses
C.J :Chief Justice
U.S. : United States
O.B.C : Other Backward Classes

3 | Page


1) Can state make provision under the orders of executive ?

Constitution of India, Art 15 (4) state can make provision under by executive order
legislation not necessary.
It would be unreasonable to suggest that the state must necessarily mean the legislature and not
the government. Besides, where the constitution intended that the a certain action should be
taken by legislation and not by executive action it has adopted suitable phraseology in that
behalf. therefore when article 15 (4) contemplates that the state can make the special provision in
question , the said provision can be made by an executive order and legislation for the purpose is
not necessary .

2) Article 15(4) relation with article 15(1) and 29(2)?

Constitution of India , article 15 (4) scope Article 15 (4) has to be read as provision to article 15
(1) and 29 (2)
Article 15(4) was added by constitution (1 Amendment) act, 1951. The objective of this
amendment was to bring article 15 and 19 in line with article 16(4) . Article 15(4) has to be read
as proviso or an exception to article 15(1) and 29(2) . if an order is justified by the provision of
article 15(4) its validity cannot be impeached on the ground that it violates article 15(1) or article
29(2) . The fundamental rights guarantee by the said two provisions which it is permissible to
make under article 15(4).

3) Can reservation be solely based on caste ?

Constitution of India article 15(4) special provision for advancement of socially and
educationally backward classes of citizens order of Mysore government dated 31-7-1962
reserving seats in technical institution for backward classes validity under the order
classification is based solely on consideration of caste order is therefore invalid.

4 | Page

The backward classes for whose improvement special provision is contemplated by article 15(4)
are in the matter of their backwardness compare to Schedule caste and Schedule tribe. The
backwardness under article 15(4) must be social and educational . it is not either social or
educational , but it is both social and educational .In dealing with the question as to whether any
class of citizen is socially backward or not, it may not be irrelevant to consider the caste of the
said group of citizens. In this connection it is, however necessary to bear in mind that special
provision is contemplated for classes of citizens and not for individual citizens as such, and so ,
through the caste of the group of citizens may be relevant, its importance should not
exaggerated. If the classification of backward class of citizens was based solely on the caste of
the citizens, it may not always be logical and may perhaps contain the vice of perpetuating the
caste themselves. Social backwardness is on the ultimate analysis, the result of poverty to a very
large extent. The occupation of citizens may also contribute to make classes of citizens socially
backward. There are some occupations which are treated as inferior according to controvicial
beliefs and classes of citizens who follow this occupation are apt to become socially backward.
The place of habitation also plays not a minor part in determine the backwardness of community
of persons.
Under the order of government of Mysore state (dated 31-7-1962) by which 68 percent of seats
available for admission to the engineering and medical college and to other technical institutions
are reserved for backward classes, more backward classes , scheduled caste and schedule tribes
the classification of the socially backward classes of citizens made by the state proceeds on the
consideration only of their castes without regard to the other factors which are undoubtedly
relevant. If that be so, the social backwardness of the communities to whom the impugns order
applies has been determine in a manner which is not permissible under art. 15 (4) and that itself
would introduce an infirmity which is fatal to the validity of the said classification.

4) Was the order of Mysore Government is fraud on constitutional power

conferred any Article 15(4)?
Constitution of India, Art. 15(4) order of Mysore government dated 31-7-62 reserving seats for
backward classes in technical institution Is fraud on constitutional power conferred by Art.
When it is said about an executive action that it is fraud on the constitution , it does not
necessarily mean that the action is patently and plainly outside the limits of the constitutional
authority conferred on the state in that behalf is struck down as being ultra-virus.If on the other
hand ,the executive action does not patently or overtly transgress the authority conferred on it by
the constitution , but the transgression is covert or latent , the said action is struck down as being
5 | Page

a fraud on the relevant constitutional power. It is in this connection that courts often consider the
substance of the matter and not its form and in ascertain the substance of the matter, the
appearance or the cloak, or the veil of the executive action , in substance and in truth the
constitutional power has been transgressed , the impugned action is struck down as a fraud on the
constitution . The order of the Mysore Government dated 31-7-1962 reserving seats for
backward classes in technical institutions has categorised the backward classes on the sole basis
of caste which is not permitted by the impugned order is plainly inconsistent with the concept of
the special provision authorised by art. 15(4) . Therefore the impunged order is a fraud on the
constitutional power conferred on the state by art. 15(4).

5) Measures to be







Constitution of India , Art. 15(4) Measures to be taken by state Government for removing
If the state Government to afford financial assistance and make monetary grants to students
seeking higher education where it is shown that the annual income of their families is below a
prescribed minimum , it may afford relief to and assist the advancement of the backward classes
in the state , because backwardness, social and educational, is ultimately and primarily due to
poverty. An attempt can also be made to start newer and more educational institutions,
polytechnics, vocational institutions and even rural Universities and thereby create more
opportunities for higher education. This dual attack on the problem posed by the weakness of
backward communities can claim to proceed on rational, broad and scientific approach which is
consistent with, and true to, the Nobel ideal of a secular welfare democratic state set up by the
constitution of this country. Such an approach can be supplemented , it it is necessary , by
providing special provision by way of reservation to aid the backward classes and schedule caste
and tribes. It may be well that there may be other ways and means of achieving the same result.
In our country where social and economic conditions differ from state to state , it would be ideal
to expect absolute uniformity of approach ; but in taking executive action to implement the
policy of Art. 15(4) , it is necessary for the states to remember that the policy which is intended
to be implemented is the policy which has been declared by art. 46 and the preamble of the
constitution. It is for the attainment of Social and Economic Justice that Art. 15(4) authorises the
making od special provisions for the advancement of the communities there contemplated even if
such provisions may be inconsistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed under Art. 15 or Art.
29(2). The context, therefore requires that the executive action taken by the state must be based
on an objective approach, free from all extraneous pressures . The said action is intended to be
social and economic justice and must be taken in a manner that justice is and should be done.

6 | Page

"It is against the fundamental principles of humanity, it is against the dictates of reason that a
man should, by reason of birth, be denied or given extra privileges" -Mahatma Gandhi

The Fundamental Rights in Constitution of India guarantee to all Indian citizens that they can
live their life in peaceful manner as long as they are in the Indian democracy. It includes
individual rights common to most liberal democracies, such as equality before the law, freedom
of speech and expression, freedom of association and peaceful assembly, freedom of religion,
and the right to constitutional remedies and cultural and educational rights.
In Democratic State like ours, all the citizens have got some rights for the development of their
life. These rights are given to them by our constitution. No one even the government can take
them away. And if, any government tries to do so, citizens can go to the court to get justice.
Hence, such rights are called Fundamental Rights.
The main aim is to increase the diversity in campuses for weaker sections group by lowering the
cut off limits that are under represented due to caste in comparison to the number proportion with
that of general population.
Article 15 secures the citizens from every sort of discrimination by the State, on the grounds of
religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth or any of them. However, this Article does not prevent
the State from making any special provisions for women or children. Further, it also allows the
State to extend special provisions for socially and economically backward classes for their
advancement. It applies to the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) as well.

7 | Page

State of Madras Vs Smt.Champakam Dorairajan

This is one of the landmark judgement given by the Supreme Court of India in context to
amendment of our Constitution. This case led to the First Amendment of the Constitution of
India. It was the first and the most important case regards to the reservation in Indian
constitution. In its ruling the Supreme Court upheld the Madras High Court verdict, which in
turn had struck down the Communal Government Order (G.O) passed in 1927 in the Madras
Presidency. The Communal G.O had provided caste based reservation in government jobs and
college seats. The Supreme Courts verdict held that providing such reservations was in violation
of Article 16 (2) of the Indian Constitution. Article 16 (2) says that No citizen can be
discriminated as per religion, caste, race, sex, place of birth etc for employment in any office
under the state. It was this judgment that necessitated the Constitution First Amendment, which
added Clause (4) to Article 15. (It was later found that the woman had filed the writ petition
under a false affidavit).however this case was overruled in Balaji v. state of Mysore

8 | Page

Article 15 of the Constitution provides that no citizen shall be subjected to discrimination in
matters of rights, privileges and immunities pertaining to him.It lays down that
(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste,
sex, place of birth or any of them
(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them,
be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and palaces of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or
partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women
and children
(4) Nothing in this article or in clause ( 2 ) of Article 29 shall prevent the State from making any
special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of
citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
(5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State
from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and
educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in
so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including
private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority
educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30.

9 | Page

The guarantee under Article 15 is available to citizens only and not to every person whether
citizen or non-citizen as applicable under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Article 15 directs that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of
religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth or any of them. Any law discriminating on one or
more on these grounds would be void. The word, only has been purposely used In the Article.

Discrimination based on one or more of these grounds and also on other grounds or grounds will
not be affected by Article 15 (1). It means that if one or more of the specified grounds is
combined with a ground not mentioned In Article 15 (1); the laws will be outside the prohibition
contained in Article 15 (1). Article 15 (1) prohibits discrimination on the ground of birth and not
that of residence. A State can, therefore, grant concessions to its residents in matters of fees in an
educational institution.
Article 15 (2) applies to States as well as private actions while Article 15(1) refers to the
obligation of the States only.
Clauses (3) and (4) of Article 15 embodies exception to the general rule enunciated above. They
empower the State to make special provisions for women and children and for the advancement
of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens for the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes.

10 | P a g e

Equality before law
The state shall not deny any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within
the territory of India.
Article 14 uses two expressions,
equality before the law and
equal protection of the laws.
The underlying principle of Article 14 is that, all persons and things similarly circumstanced
should be treated alike, both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed.
Amongst equals the law should be equal and should be equally administered.
The like should be treated alike. What is prohibited is discrimination between persons who are
substantially, in similar circumstances or conditions.
Article 14 applies to any person and is not limited to citizens alone. Both individuals and
juristic persons are entitled to the benefit of Article 14. Thus, Constitutional provisions obligate
the states to be non-discriminatory as the right to equality is an essential postulate, a guarantee or
important principle of the Constitution. It was held in Natural Resource Allocation, re, Special
Reference No. I of 2012 that the objective Article 14 is to secure to all persons, citizens and noncitizens, equality of status and opportunity referred to in the Preamble. Balancing of individual
rights with societal or collective rights is a part of mandate under Article 14. True effect of
Article 14 is to ensure that few individuals do not enrich themselves at the cost of all others that
would amount to deprivation to the plurality, i.e. the nation itself . According to Chandrachud CJ,
positive equality is the antithesis to arbitrariness. Krishna Iyer J was of the view that equality is
the ally of demagogic authoritarianism. Right to equality is ensured by two concepts:

11 | P a g e

Equality before law, and;

Equal protection of laws.
The word law in the former expression is used in a generic sense whereas the word laws in
the latter expression denoted specific laws.The expression equality before law is a negative
concept , similar to Dicean concept of rule of law in England. It is a declaration of equality of
persons and is taken from English common law. Explaining this concept, Dicey opined, with us
every official, from a Prime Minister down to a constable, or a collector of taxes is under the
same responsibility for any act done without any legal justification as any other citizen. In his
treatise, Law of the Constitution, Dicey identified three principles that together establish the rule
of law.
i)Absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence ofarbitrary
ii) Equality before the law or the equal subjection of all the classes to the ordinary law of theland
administered by the ordinary courts;
iii) Law of the constitution is a consequence of the rights of individuals as defined andenforced
by the courts.

1.1 Equality Before Law

The guarantee of equality before law insists upon even administration of justice and ensures to
everyman, the freedom under law. It is a concept implying the absence of any special privilege in
favor ofany individual. It brings about subjection of all persons to the ordinary law or as Dicey
would put it,to the regular law of land, and to the jurisdiction and authority of the ordinary
regular law courts.This is, however , not an absolute rule and there are numbers of exceptions to
it, for example, foreign diplomats enjoy immunity from a countrys judicial process; Article 361
extends to the President of India and the State Governors. Public officers and judges also enjoy

12 | P a g e

some protection ; similarly, backward classes and some special groups have also been given
special privileges . According to Dr. Jennings, equality before law means that amongst equals,
law should be equal and equally administered, that, like should be treated alike. The right to sue
and be sued, to prosecuteand be prosecuted, for the same kind of action should be same for all
citizens of full age andunderstanding without the distinction of race, religion, wealth, social
status, or political influence.

1.2 Equal Protection of Laws

The concept of equality is positive in nature and is taken from the US Constitutions 14th
Amendment, which states the equal protection will be meted out to persons in Similar
circumstances. The US Supreme Court has, from time to time, described it as a pledge of equal
laws and has provided for subjection for subjection to equal laws applying alike to all in any like
situation. Intended to afford legal equality to the blacks as against the white, it is said to mean
equality amongst equals. It implies that there should be no discrimination between one person
and another .The second expression of equal protection of laws is corollary of the first and it is
difficult to imagine a situation of any violation of equality before law, without violation of equal
protection if laws.Thus, what is meant by two principles is that like should be treated alike,
recognizing the fact that absolute equality might lead to inequality.

13 | P a g e


Article 14 declares that the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law and equal
protection of the laws within the territory of india and Article 15(4) says that Nothing in this
article or in clause ( 2 ) of Article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision
for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. . Where Article 29(2) states that No citizen shall
be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out
of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them. So at first it
might look that article 14 and 15(4) are contradicting each other but if we try to understand it
than article 14 itself permits the special provisions which should be made to the secure or
develop the backward class of our society.
Basically article 14 lays down two phrases equality before the law and equal protection of the
law. the expression equal protection of the law is positive concept implying equality of
treatment in equal circumstances. In simple words it can be stated that like should be treated
like and unlike should be treated alike. Justice Fazal Ali J. Mentioned in Chiranjit lal v. Union
of India that the equal protection of laws guaranteed by Article 14 does not mean that all laws
must be general in character . It does not mean that the same laws should apply to all persons. It
does not mean that the same laws should be apply to all persons. It does not mean that every law
has universal application for, all persons are not , by nature attainment or circumstances in the
same position. The varying needs of different classes of persons often require separate treatment.
In the case of Abdul rehman v. Pinto the court held that from the very nature of society there
should be different laws for different places amd the legislature controls the policy and enact
laws in the best interest of the safety and security of the state.In fact, identical treatment in
unequal circumstances would amount to,a reasonable classification is not only
permitted but is necessary if society is to progress.

14 | P a g e

While Article 14 forbids class legislation it does not forbid reasonable classification of persons,
objects, and transactions by the legislature for the purpose of achieving specific ends. But
classification must not be arbitrary ,artificial or evasive. It must always rest upon some real
upon some real and substantial distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the object
sought to be achieved by the legislation. Classification to be reasonable must fulfil the following
two conditions
(1) The classification must be founded on the intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons
or thing that are grouped together from others left out of the group
(2) The differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the act.

The differentia which is the basis of the classification and the object of the act are two distinct
things. What is necessary is that there must be nexus between the basis of classification and the
object of the act which makes the classification. It is only when there is no reasonable basis for a
classification that legislation making such classification may be declared discriminatory. Thus
the legislature may fix the age at which persons shall be deemed competent to contract between
themselves but no one will claim that competency. No contract can be made to depend upon the
stature or colour of the hair. Such a classification will be arbitrary.
The true meaning and scope of Article 14 have been explained in a number of cases by the
supreme court. In view of this the propositions laid down in Damia case still hold good
governing a valid classification and are as follows.

1.A law may be constitutional even though it relates to a single individual if on account of some
special circumstances or reasons applicable to him and not applicable to others, that single
individual may be treated as a class by itself

15 | P a g e

2. There is always presumption in favour of the constitutionality of a statute and the burden is
upon him who attacks it to show that there has been a clear transgression of constitutional
3.The presumption may be rebutted in certain cases by showing that on the fact of the statue,
there is no classification and no difference peculiar to any individual or class and not applicable
to any other individual or class, and yet the law hits only a particular individual or class
4. It must be assumed that Legislature correctly understand and appreciates the need of its own
people that its law are directed to problem made manifest by experience and that its
discrimination are based on adequate grounds
5. In order to sustain the presumption of constitutionality the court may take into consideration
maters of common knowledge, matters of report, the history of the times and may assume every
state of facts which can be conceived existing at the time of the legislation.
6. Thus the legislation is free to recognize degrees of harm and may confine its restriction to
those cases where the need is deemed to be the clearest.
7. While good faith and knowledge of the existing conditions on the part of a legislature are to be
presumed, if there is nothing on the face of the law or the surrounding circumstances brought to
the notice of the court on which the classification may reasonable be regarded as based, the
presumption of constitutionality cannot be carried to extent always that there must be some
undisclosed and unknown reason for subjecting certain individuals or corporation to be hostile
or discriminating legislation
8.The classification may be made on different bases e.g. geographical or according to object or
occupation or the like.
9. The classification made by the legislature need not be scientifically perfect or logically
complete.Mathematical nicety and perfect equality are not required.
Equality before the law does not require mathematical equality of all persons in all
circumstances. Equal treatment does not mean identical treatment. Similarly not identity of
treatment is enough.

16 | P a g e

10. There can be discrimination both in the substantive as well as the procedural law. Article 14
applies to both.

If the classification satisfies the test laid down in the above propositions, the law will be declared
constitutional. The question whether a classification is reasonable and proper and not must
however, be judged more on commonsense than on legal subtitles.
Hence this proves that the reasonable classification is valid under the Article 14 and the theory of
like should be treated like and unlike should be treated alike gives us conclusion that certain
reservations can be given to depressed to make them equals.

17 | P a g e



On July 26, 1958, the State of Mysore issued an order that all the communities excepting
the Brahmin community, fell within the definition of educationally and socially
backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and 75% of seats in
educational institutions were reserved for them.

Similar orders reserving seats were issued on May 14, 1959, July 22, 1959, June 9, 1960
and July 10, 1961.

The petitioners' case is that the impugned order which has been passed under Art. 15
(4) is not valid because the basis adopted by the order in specifying and enumerating the
socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the State is unintelligible and
irrational, and the classification made on the said basis is in consistent with and outside
the provisions of Art. 15 (4).

The percentage of seats reversed varied in various orders, but all of them were set aside
when challenged.

On July 31, 1962, the State of Mysore passed another order which superseded all
previous orders made by the State under Art. 15 (4) for reservation of seats.

Under that order, the backward classes were divided into two categories, backward
classes and more backward classes. The order reserved 68% of the seats in the
engineering and medical colleges and other technical institutions for the educationally
and socially backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and left only
32 per cent seats for the merit pool.

18 | P a g e

The order was challenged by 23 petitioners by a writ petition under Art. 32. The
petitioners contended that but for the reservations made by the impugned order, they
would have been entitled to admission in the respective colleges for which they had
applied. They contended that the classification made under the order was irrational and
the reservation of 68% seats made by the order was a fraud on Art. 15 (4) of the

Held, that the impugned order was a fraud on the constitutional power conferred on the State
by Art. 15(4) and the same be quashed. The impugned order categorises the backward classes
on the sole basis of caste which is not permitted by Art. 15 (4). The reservation of 68% is
inconsistent with the concept of the special provision authorised by Art. 15 (4). However, this
Court would not attempt to lay down definitely and in an inflexible manner as to what should
be the proper percentage for reservation.
Reservation should and must be adopted to advance the prospects of weaker sections of
society, but while doing so, care should be taken not to exclude admission to higher
educational centres of deserving and qualified candidates of other communities. Reservations
under Arts. 15 (4) and 16 (4) must be within reasonable limits.The interests of weaker
sections of society, which are a first charge on the States and the Centre, have to be adjusted
with the interests of the community as a whole. Speaking generally and in a broad way, a special
provision should be less than 50%.The actual percentage must depend upon the relevant
prevailing circumstances in each case.
The object of Art. 15 (4) is to advance the interests of the society as a whole by looking after the
interests of the weaker elements in society. If a provision under Art. 15 (4) ignores the
interests of society, that is clearly outside the scope of Art. 15 (4) . It is extremely unreasonable
to assume that in enacting Art. 15 (4), Parliament intended to provide that where the
advancement of the backward classes or the Scheduled Castes and Tribes were concerned,
the fundamental right of the citizens constituting the rest of the society were to be completely
and absolutely ignored. Considerations of national interest and the interests of the community
and the society as a whole have already to be kept in mind.

19 | P a g e

Article 15 was amended and Art. 15 (4) was added in view of the judgment of this Court in the
State of Madras v. Smt. Champakam Dorairajan and The State of Madras v. C. R.Srinivasan
[1951] S. C. R. 525.Article 15 (4) is a proviso or an exception to Arts. 15 (1) and 29 (2). If an
order is justified by the provisions of Art. 15 (4), its validity cannot be questioned on the
ground that it violates Art. 15 (4) or Art. 29 (2).

It is true that the Constitution contemplates the appoint-ment of a commission whose report and
recommendations can be of assistance to the authorities concerned for taking
adequate steps for the advancement of backward classes, but this does not mean that the
appointment of the commission and the subsequent steps that would follow it are a
condition precedent to any action being taken under Art.15(4). The special provisions
contemplated under Art. 15 (4) can be made by the Union or the States by an executive
order.It cannot be said that the President alone can make special provision for the
advancement of the backward classes.
Article 15 (4) authorises the State to make special pro vision
for the advancement of
socially and educationally backward classes of citizens as distinguished from the Scheduled
Castes and
Scheduled Tribes. Some backward classes may, by presidential order, be
included in Scheduled Castes and Tribes, and in that sense the backward classes for whose
improvement provision is made in Art. 15 (4) are comparable to Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes. The backwardness under Art. 15 (4) must be social and educational. It is
not either social or educational, but it is both social and educational. Though caste in relation to
Hindus may be a relevant factor to consider in determining the social backwardness of groups
or classes of citizens, it cannot be made the sole or dominant test. There are certain sections of
Indian society such as Christians, Jains, Muslims, etc., who do not believe in caste system,
and the test of caste does not apply to them. Moreover, social backwardness is in the
Ultimate analysis the result of poverty to a very large extent.
The classes of citizens who are deplorably poor automatically socially backward.
Moreover, the occupation of citizens and the place of their habitation also result in social
backwardness.The problem of determining who are socially backward classes, is undoubtedly
very complex, but the classification of socially backward citizens on the basis of their castes
alone is not permissible under Art. 15(4).

20 | P a g e

In determining the educational backwardness of a class of citizens, the literacy test supplied by
the Census Reports is not adequate. It is doubtful if the test of the average of the student
population in the last three high school classes is appropriate in determining educational
backwardness. In any case, the State is not justified in including, in the list of backward
classes castes or communities whose average of student population per thousand is slightly
above or very near or just below the State average. The legitimate view to take is that the
classes of citizens whose average is well or substantially below the State average can be treated
as educationally backward. It is not for this Court to lay down any hard and fast rule in this
matter.It is the duty of the State to decide the matter in a manner which is consistent with the
requirements of Art. 15 (4).

The division of backward classes into two categories of backward classes and more backward
classes is not warranted by Art. 15 (4). Art. 15 (4) authorises special provision
made for the really backward classes but by introducing two categories, what is
intended is to devise measures for all classes of citizens who are less advanced
as compared to the most advanced classes in the State.That is not the scope of Art. 15 (4).
The object of making a special provision for the advancement of castes or communities is to
carry out the Directive Principle enshrined in Art- 46.Unless the educational and economic
interests of the weaker sections of the people are promoted quickly and liberally, the ideal of
establishing social and economic equality cannot be attained. Article 15 (4) authorises the State
to take adequate steps to achieve the object.
While making adequate reservation under Art. 16 (4),care should be taken not to provide for
unreasonable, excessive or extravagant reservation because that would by eliminating general
competition in a large field and by creating widespread dissatisfaction among the employees,
materially affect their efficiency. Like the
special provision improperly made under Art.
15 (4), reservation made under Art. 16 (4) beyond the permissible and legitimate limits is a
fraud on the Constitution.

21 | P a g e

In balaji v. state of mysore, the mysore government issued an order under article 15(4) reserving
seats in the medical and engineering colleges in the state as follows:
Backward class 28%
More backward class 20%
Scheduled castes and tribe 18%
Thus 68% of the seats available in the colleges were reserved and only 32% was made available
to the merit pool. The validity of the order was challenged by candidates who had secured more
marks than those admitted under the order. Through qualified on merit they had failed to get
admission only be reason of the government order. The court held that the sub classification
made by the order between backward classes and more backward classes was not justified
under article 15(4). Backwardness as envisaged by the article 15(4) must be both social and
educational and not either social and educational. Through caste may be relevant factors to be
taken into consideration. Article 15(4) does not speak of caste but only speak classes, and caste
and class are synonymous. The impugned order however proceeds on the basis of caste without
regards to other relevant factors and that is sufficient to render the other invalid. The court said
that the state was not justified in including in the backward classes all those castes and
communitys whose average of student population per thousand was slightly above or very near
or just below the state average. Only those which were well below the average can be regarded
as backward. Thus the main defect of the system adopted by the state was that under it 90% of
the population of the state was backward.
It was held that this was inconsistent with article 15(4) . reservation of 68% of seats in technical
institution such as engineering and medical collages to the exclusion of all other candidates if a
single candidate from the ST was available, would amount to fraud upon the constitution clause
4 of the article 15 only enables the state to make special and not exclusive provision for the
backward classes. The state was not be justified ignoring altogether advancement of the rest of
the society in it zeal to promote the welfare of backward classes. National interest would suffer
if qualified and competent student were excluded from admission in institution in higher
Speaking generally, the court said , the special provision should be less than 50% how much less
than 50% would depend upon the relevant prevailing circumstances in each case.

22 | P a g e

Reservation did not provide equal opportunities within each group/community to all
beneficiaries. Consequently, different castes and tribes within a group/community have not
benefited from reservation equally. Almost in all categories of beneficiaries among scheduled
castes, scheduled tribes or other backward classes and minorities, there is a growing sense of
deprivation amongst different categories, which is leading to internal dissension.
However the occupation reservation policy has three important flaws. First, it has a
discriminatory bias alongside Muslims who do not advantage from such policies. Second, it
emphasizes caste or tribe rather than income or wealth: The goal of reservation in India has been
to bring about an improvement in the welfare who, historically, have been economically and
socially depressed. But, in arriving at this judgment about who should be eligible for reservation,
the criterion has been a persons caste rather than his income or wealth. Consequently, groups
belonging to what Article 115 of the Indian Constitution calls socially and educationally
backward classes have benefited from reservation even though, in practice, many of these
groups could not be regarded as backward. This has meant that many of the benefits of
reservation have been captured by well-off groups from the depressed classes (for example,
chamars from the SC) while poorer groups from the depressed (for example, bhangis from the
SC) have failed to benefit.
Criticism of Article 15
The clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15 have often being criticised as a part of the vote catching
mechanism. These provisions were challenged by various people, who were of the opinion that
the reservation policy clearly intended in these provisions was a measure of reparation. The
clause was also challenged on the ground that identification of OBC was made only on the basis
of caste and hence its unreasonable.

23 | P a g e

Whether to have a reservation or quota system or not is still a debatable question in India. The
Indian Constitution has a law for the same and according to this; reservation has been made to
bring underprivileged classes at par with privileged or general ones. There are numerous
reservations like reservation for women, reservation for physically challenged, reservation for
economically backward class, reservation for Scheduled Castes etc. Though, reservation system
is an evident discrimination, but it had been started with a very good objective of uplifting the
socially backward society to give
them equality of opportunities. But with time its meaning and the way it has been taken by the
people has left many of us to believe that it has stopped delivering for what it was made. People
have started misusing it. There are many examples of people making false documents just to get
a seat in a college or a job. This leaves the more eligible candidate to give their seat to a person
belonging to a reserve category. Also the reservation system in India is creating a workforce that
is not capable enough to compete at the global level. India needs people for growth and
development but reservation is adding undeserving candidates as well. So I think reservation
system should be demolished and if the government really wants to uplift the underprivileged
sections of the society then a well-balanced policies should be formulated. First of all such
sections of the society should be clearly identified that need development and financial aids.
Then to uplift them free education, or incentives and financial assistance should be provided.
Once done let them face the competition, true competition. Make them capable, show them the
right path and infuse a fighting spirit in them as no one is against healthy competition.

24 | P a g e




25 | P a g e