Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination)

Article – 15

Prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth:

When a law comes within the prohibition of Article-15, it cannot be validated without Article-14 by applying the principle of reasonable classification.

There are 5 clauses under Article-15, they are:

15(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on the grounds 

only of Religions, Race, Caste, Sex, Place of birth or any of them.

15(2) No citizen shall on the grounds only of Religions, Race, Caste, Sex, 

Place of birth or any of them, be the subject of any of the disability, 

liability, restrictions or any condition with regard to:

Access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and any places of public entertainment or

The use of Wells, tanks, Bathing Ghats, Roads and the places of public resort maintained wholly or partially out of state funds or is dedicated to the use of general public.

15(3) Nothing in this Article shall prevent the state from making any special 

provisions for the women and children.

15(4) The fourth clause which was added by the constitution 

(1st Amendment) Act 1951, enables the state to make a special 

provision for the protection of the interest of the backward classes of

 citizens and is therefore an exception to the Article-15 and 29(2) of 

the constitution.

Under clause-15(4), there are 2 things to be determined:

Socially and educationally backward classes,

The limit of reservation

In Balaji

   V

State of Mysore

The Mysore government issued an order under the Article – 15(4) reserving the seats in the medical and engineering colleges in the state as follows:

Backward Classes 28%

More Backward Classes 20%

Scheduled Castes and tribes 18%

Thus, 68% of the seats available in the colleges were reserved and only 32% seats were made available to merit students.

The Supreme Court laid down that there should be no reservation more than 50% if giving more that 50%, then it is Invalid.

In Devdasan

      V

       Union of India

This case is known as the Carry Forward Rule.

It means that vacancy remains unfilled for the non-availability of the candidates may be filled by reserved candidate in subsequent year

In Indra Sawhney

V

Union of India

This case is also known as Mandal Commission Case.

In this case, the Supreme Court over- ruled the decision in the Devdasan Case and upheld the validity of the carry forward rule, subject to the condition that it does not result in Breach of 50% rule.

15(5) By the constitution (93rd Amendment) Act 2005, the Parliament 

inserted the clause(5) in Article-15,

It says that,

The state is empowered to make any special provisions for the 

backward classes or for the ST and ST, regarding their admission to 

Education Institution except the minority Educational Institutions as 

referred in clause(1) of Article-30.

Stay Tuned!!