Skip to main content

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!!

Labels:
Location: Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Republic Day 26 Jan 2021 Celebration at ETA GARDEN Apartment

 Republic Day 26 Jan 2021 Celebration at ETA GARDEN Apartment I, Trilok Chand Gupta Joint Secretary of ETA Garden have celebrated and raised our country Flag at our pavilion. It's been published in the News Paper for welcoming people for Flag Hoisting.
Post a Comment
Read more

Winding Up Companies rules Section 272

Winding Up: 1) Winding up of a company is a process through which the life of the company comes into an end. 2) In this process the management of the company is taken away from the hands of the Directors of the company. 3) An administrator called a liquidator is appointed and he takes the control of the company, collects the assets, liabilities are discharged (i.e. all the creditors) and finally distributes if any surplus among the members. 4) At the end of the winding up, the company is left with no assets and liabilities and thus gets formally dissolved. Compulsory Winding up: 1) The winding up process done by the tribunal is known a compulsory winding up of a company. 2) It is also known as Tribunal Winding up. 3) Chapter XX, Part – 1of the CA 2013 deals with the compulsory winding up. Grounds for winding up by Tribunal: 1) Special Resolution 2) Acts against sovereignty 3) Default in filing the statements 4) Fraudulent Conduct 5) Just and Equitable. Person who can file a Petition to...
Post a Comment
Read more

UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY, RIOT, AFFRAY

Unlawful Assembly (Section 141): Unlawful assembly is an assembly of 5 or more persons with the common object: 1)  to over-throw by criminal force the Government or the legislature or 2)  To resist the execution of any legal process 3)  To commit mischief (Sec-425), criminal trespass (441) 4)  To obtain property or right by criminal force or 5)  To criminally force a person to do an act which he is not bound to do, or to force him not to do an act which he is bound to do. If a person is a member of an unlawful assembly then that person is punishable. An assembly which is not unlawful in the beginning may become unlawful subsequently. The purpose or common object decides the nature of the assembly. Essentials: 1)  The essentials are that there should be five or more persons and there should be the common object as specified in Sec-141. 2)  This is different from common intention in Sec-34. For unlawful assembly prior meeting of minds is not essential. 3...
Post a Comment
Read more