Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India

Last updated
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
Emblem of the Supreme Court of India.svg
Court Supreme Court of India
Full case nameIndra Sawhney & Ors. v. Union of India
Decided16 November 1992
Citation(s)AIR 1993 SC 477; 1992 Supp 2 SCR 454
Case history
Subsequent action(s)See below
Court membership
Judges sitting M.H. Kania (CJ), M. N. Venkatachaliah, S. R. Pandian, Dr. T.K. Thommen, A.M. Ahmadi, Kuldip Singh, P.B. Sawant, R.M. Sahai, B.P. Jeevan Reddy
Chief judgeBibek mandal
Case opinions
Decision byKania C.J., Venkatachaliah, Ahmadi and B.P. Jeevan Reddy, JJ.
MajorityKania CJ., Venkatachaliah, Pandian, Ahmadi, Sawant and B.P. Jeevan Reddy JJ.
Concur/dissentPandian J., Sawant J., and Ahmadi J.
DissentDr. Thommen J., Singh J., and Sahai J.

Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India also known as the Mandal verdict was an Indian landmark public interest litigation case delivered by a 9-judge constitution bench. [1] [2]

Contents

Facts

The constitution recognized social and educational backwardness, but not economic backwardness. The court upheld separate reservation for OBC in central government jobs, but excluded these to the "creamy layer" (the forward section of a backward class, above a certain income). [3] [ unreliable source? ] [4] At no point should the reservation exceed 50%. [5]

The genesis of the debate was in 1980, when the Second Backward Classes Committee, headed by BP Mandal, submitted its report. The report recommended 27 percent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and 22.5 percent for the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes.

The Central government, however, acted on the report a decade later, by issuing an office memorandum (OM), providing 27 percent vacancies for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes to be filled by direct recruitment.

Indra Sawhney, the petitioner in this case, made three principal arguments against the Order: [6] [7]

The five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court issued a stay on the operation of the Government Order of 13 August till the final disposal of the case.

Judgement

On 16 November 1992, the Supreme Court, in its verdict, upheld the government order, being of the opinion that caste was an acceptable indicator of backwardness. [7] Thus, the recommendation of reservations for OBCs in central government services was finally implemented in 1992. [8] The Supreme Court of India gave verdict that 27% central government reservation for OBCs is valid. [4] However, some states denied the existence of the creamy layer, and a report commissioned by the supreme court was implemented. The case was pressed again in 1999 and, in 2006, the supreme court reaffirmed the creamy layer exclusion and extended it to SCs and STs. [1] This judgement also overruled General Manager Southern Railway v. Rangachari and Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh (Railway) v. Union of India verdicts, which said that reservations could be made in promotions as well as appointments. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India held that reservations cannot be applied in promotions.

1992 Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India judgment laid down the limits of the state's powers: it upheld the ceiling of 50 per cent quotas, emphasized the concept of "social backwardness", and prescribed 11 indicators to ascertain backwardness. The nine-Judge Bench judgement also established the concept of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer". [9] [10] [11] The creamy layer is only applicable in the case of Other Backward Castes and not applicable on other group like SC or ST. The creamy layer criterion was introduced at Rs 100,000 in 1993, and revised to Rs 250,000 in 2004, Rs 450,000 in 2008, Rs 600,000 in 2013 and 800,000 in 2015.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arjun Singh (Madhya Pradesh politician)</span> 12th Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, India

Arjun Singh was an Indian politician from the Indian National Congress, who served twice as the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh in the 1980s. He also served twice as the Union Minister of Human Resource Development, in the Manmohan Singh and P. V. Narasimha Rao ministries.

The Other Backward Class (OBC) is a collective term used by the Government of India to classify castes that are educationally or socially backward. It is one of several official classifications of the population of India, along with general castes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs). The OBCs were found to comprise 52% of the country's population by the Mandal Commission report of 1980 and were determined to be 41% in 2006 when the National Sample Survey Organisation took place. There is substantial debate over the exact number of OBCs in India; it is generally estimated to be sizable, but many believe that it is higher than the figures quoted by either the Mandal Commission or the National Sample Survey.

The Mandal Commission or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Commission (SEBC), was established in India in 1979 by the Janata Party government under Prime Minister Morarji Desai with a mandate to "identify the socially or educationally backward classes" of India. It was headed by B. P. Mandal, an Indian member of parliament, to consider the question of reservations for people to address caste discrimination, and to use eleven social, economic, and educational indicators to determine backwardness. In 1980, based on its rationale that OBCs identified on the basis of caste, social, economic indicators made up 52% of India's population, the commission's report recommended that members of Other Backward Classes (OBC) be granted reservations to 27% of jobs under the central government and public sector undertakings, thus making the total number of reservations for SC, ST and OBC to 49.5%.

Reservation is a system of affirmative action in India created during the British rule. It provides historically disadvantaged groups representation in education, employment, government schemes, scholarships and politics. Based on provisions in the Indian Constitution, it allows the Union Government and the States and Territories of India to set reserved quotas or seats, at particular percentage in Education Admissions, Employments, Political Bodies, Promotions, etc., for "socially and educationally backward citizens."


The Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) practices affirmative action and offers reservation to the "backward and weaker sections" of the society that includes SC/ST/OBC-NCL/EWS/PWD/Girl candidates.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2006 Indian anti-reservation protests</span> Protest in India against reservation for OBCs

The 2006 Indian anti-reservation protests were a series of protests that took place in India in 2006 in opposition to the decision of the Union Government of India, led by the Indian National Congress-headed multiparty coalition United Progressive Alliance, to implement reservations for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in central and private institutes of higher education. These protests were one of the two major protests against the Indian reservation system, the other one being the 1990 anti-Mandal protests.

Forward caste is a term used in India to denote castes which are not listed in SC, ST or OBC reservation lists. They are on average considered ahead of other castes economically and educationally. They account for about 30.8% of the population based on Schedule 10 of available data from the National Sample Survey Organisation 55th (1999–2000) and National Sample Survey Organisation 61st Rounds (2004–05) Round Survey.

Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India is an Indian public interest litigation case challenging the conclusion of the Mandal Commission that about 52% of the total population of India belonged to Other Backward Classes classification. The National Sample Survey Organisation had estimated the OBC segment to be 42 per cent.

Creamy layer is a term used in Indian politics to refer to some members of a backward class who are highly advanced socially as well as economically and educationally. They constitute the forward section of that particular backward class – as forward as any other forward class member. They are not eligible for government-sponsored educational and professional benefit programs. The term was introduced by the Sattanathan Commission in 1971, which directed that the "creamy layer" should be excluded from the reservations (quotas) of civil posts. It was also identified later by Justice Ram Nandan Committee in 1993.

Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu is a system of affirmative action that provides historically disadvantaged groups representation in education and employment. Reservations in the state rose from 41 percent in 1954 to 69 percent in 1990.

The Indian judiciary has made judgments related to reservations, a system of affirmative action that provides for disadvantaged groups. These groups are primarily Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and from 1987 extended to Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Some of the court judgements have been modified by the Indian parliament.

The National Commission for Backward Classes is an Indian constitutional body under the jurisdiction of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India established through Constitution Act, 2018 this amendment act in the constitution to make it a constitutional body under Article 338B of the Indian Constitution. It was constituted pursuant to the provisions of the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.

Economically Weaker Section (EWS) in India is a subcategory of people having an annual family income less than ₹8 lakh (US$10,000) and who do not belong to any category such as SC/ST/OBC across India, nor to MBC in Tamil Nadu. A candidate who does not fall under SC/ST/OBC and fulfils the EWS economic criteria are to be part of the EWS category.

Youth For Equality is an Indian organisation against caste-based policies and reservations, i.e. affirmative action. It was founded by students in a number of Indian universities in 2006. It organises demonstrations and legal challenges against caste-based policies.

The One Hundred and Third Amendment of the Constitution of India, officially known as the Constitution Act, 2019, introduces 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) of society for admission to Central Government-run educational institutions and private educational institutions, and for employment in Central Government jobs. The Amendment does not make such reservations mandatory in State Government-run educational institutions or State Government jobs. However, some states have chosen to implement the 10% reservation for economically weaker sections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">One Hundred and Second Amendment of the Constitution of India</span>

The One Hundred and Second Amendment of the Constitution of India, officially known as the Constitution Act, 2018, granted constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">One Hundred and Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of India</span> Amendment of 2021

The One Hundred and Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of India- officially known as The Constitution Act, 2021- restored the power of State governments to recognise socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs). SEBCs, which includes the groups commonly known as Other Backward Classes (OBCs), are communities for which the State can provide 'special provisions' or affirmative action in India.

Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India , also known as the EWS Reservation case, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India.

Reservation policy in Bihar is a system of affirmative action that provides historically disadvantaged groups representation in education and employment. Reservations in the state rose from 60 percent in 2021 to 75 percent in 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Department of Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare (Tamil Nadu)</span> Government department of Tamil Nadu state, India

The Department of Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare is one of the departments of Government of Tamil Nadu.

References

  1. 1 2 "Court, quota and cream". The Indian Express . 20 October 2006. Archived from the original on 13 May 2008. Retrieved 17 November 2011.
  2. ↑ "The Hindu Explains Why does the Supreme Court think the Mandal verdict should be referred to a larger Bench?". The Hindu. 13 March 2021.
  3. ↑ "Indra Sawhney Etc. vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. on 16 November, 1992". IndianKanoon.org. Archived from the original on 17 September 2012. Retrieved 22 August 2012. (4) Reservation being an extreme form of protective measure or affirmative action it should be confined to a minority of seats. Even though the Constitution does not lay down any specific bar but the constitutional philosophy being against proportional equality the principle of balancing equality ordains reservation, of any manner, not to exceed 50%." , "Reservation in promotion is constitutionally impermissible as once the advantaged and disadvantaged are made equal and are brought in one class or group then any further benefit extended for promotion on the inequality existing prior to being brought in the group would be treating equals unequally. It would not be eradicating the effects of past discrimination but perpetuating it.
  4. 1 2 Nair, Shalini (18 April 2017). "BJP's OBC pitch: How stronger new backward classes panel will function". The Indian Express . Archived from the original on 15 April 2019. Retrieved 28 March 2020.
  5. ↑ Basavaraju, C. (2009). "Reservation Under the Constitution of India: Issues and Perspectives". Journal of the Indian Law Institute. 51 (2): 271. JSTOR   43953443.
  6. ↑ Guha, Ramchandra (2017). India After Gandhi: 10th Anniversary Edition. New Delhi: Picador India. pp. 602–604. ISBN   9789382616979.
  7. 1 2 "Case analysis of Indira Sawhney v. UOI". Legal Bites - Law And Beyond. 15 September 2016. Retrieved 4 November 2017.
  8. ↑ "20 years after Mandal, less than 12% OBCs in central govt jobs - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 4 November 2017.
  9. ↑ "Explained: Order reserved". 23 March 2015. Retrieved 4 March 2019.
  10. ↑ "For an equitable society, reservations must be extended to private sector". 23 October 2015.
  11. ↑ "Plea to reconsider judgment in Indra Sawhney case of 1992". The Hindu. 23 August 2007. Retrieved 4 March 2019– via www.thehindu.com.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.