Skip to main content

Article 16

 Article – 16 : Equality of Opportunity in matters of Public Employment:

There are 5 clauses under Article-16, they are:

16(1) there shall be equality of opportunity for all the citizens in the matters relating to the employment or appointment to any office under the state.

16(2) no citizen shall, on the grounds of only Religion, Race, Caste, Sex, Descent, place of birth, residence or any of them, be ineligible for or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the state.

16(3) nothing in this Article shall prevent the parliament from making any Law prescribing, in regard to a class or the classes of the employment or an appointment to an office (under the Government of or any local or any other authority within a state or a union territory, any requirement as to a residence within that state or union territory) prior to such employment or appointment.

16(4)Article-16(4) enables the state to make the provisions for the reservation of the posts in the government jobs in the favor of any backward class of the citizens which in the opinion of the state, is not adequately represented in the services of the state.

16(4A) the newly added clause (4A) empowers the state to make any provision for the reservation in the matters of promotions for SC and ST, which in the opinion of the state is not adequately represented in the services of the state.

16(4B) The Constitution (81st Amendment) Act 2000, has added a new clause (4B) after the clause (4A) in the Article-16 of the constitution, which seeks to end the 50% limit for SC and ST and other backward classes in the backlog vacancies, this could not be filled up due to the non-availability of eligible candidates of these categories in the previous years.

16(5)Clause (5) saves a law from the operation of clauses (1) and (2), which provides the incumbent of any office a religious qualification for the appointment.

Article-16:

It is noted that under Article-16, the guarantee against the discrimination is limited to the “Employment” and “Appointment” under the state.

Article-15 however is more general and deals with all the cases of discrimination which do not fall under Article-16

Article-17

Untouchability is abolished



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

THEFT (Section 378)

  THEFT (Section 378) Sec-378 Indian Penal Code defines theft. A person is guilty of theft is he takes with dishonest intention, any moveable property, out of the possession of any person, without his consent and moves with the property. 1)  If an item is attached to the earth, it cannot be stolen, but if it is freed from the earth it may be stolen. 2)  Moving the property is essential. Removing an obstacle amounts to theft. Eg: 1) A cuts down a -tree from the field of Z with a view to dishonestly taking the 2) tree. He has committed theft. A meets a bullock cart carrying valuable articles, he causes it to be moved in a different direction with a dishonest intention to take it. This is theft. Essentials: 1. Dishonest taking. 2. Moveable property 3. Out of the possession of the person 4. Without consent 5. Moving with the property 1. Dishonest Taking: The dishonest intention is the gist of the offense. The accused must make wrongful gain or wrongful loss. The taking must b...
Post a Comment
Read more

Insanity (Section 84)

  Insanity (Sec-84) Act of a person of unsound mind is given under Sec-84 as, “Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law” The law of Insanity was introduced by a leading case of McNaughton. In R V Mc. Naughten Facts: Daniel Mc. Naughten the accused, murdered Mr. Drummond, the private secretary of Sir. Robert Peel, the Prime Minister of England, by confusion that Mr. Drummond was Sir. Robert Peel. He was tried for murder. On behalf of the accused, the defense counsel pleaded that, the accused due to the insanity, he was not able to know that he was violating the laws of God and man. It was established that the accused lost his power of control of mind, while committing the offence, a medical report was also produced to that effect. Judgment: The court acquitted Mc. Naughten on the grounds of Insanity. Mc. Naug...
Post a Comment
Read more