DMPQ: What in Indra sawney case? Explain its provision and comment on its relevance. ( Polity)

by

Indra Sawhney case vs Union of India was a judgement came in 1992. It assess the amendment made in the article 16 of the constitution and the executive order of the Narsimha govt. to grant 10% reservation to economically weaker section. Article 16(4) was inserted which stated that state can make provisions for the backward classes which are not adequately represented in the services.

          The 9 judge bench gave the following judgements:

  1. It upheld the amendment made in the article 16(4) but put a constraint on state to put a ceiling of 50% on reservation. The 50% rule was given to endure balance between merit and affirmative actions in the form of reservation.
  2. It quashed the executive order of 10% of reservation given to EWS.
  3. It quashed the promotion policy on the basis of reservation.
  4. Concept of creamy layer was given.
  5. A permanent statutory body should be established to examine complaints of over-inclusion and under-inclusion in the list of OBCs.
  6. The ‘carry forward rule’ in case of unfilled (backlog) vacancies is valid. But it should not violate 50% rule.
Final Destination for Haryana PSC Notes and Tests, Exclusive coverage of HPSC Prelims and Mains Syllabus, Dedicated Staff and guidence for HPSC Exams HPSC Notes brings Prelims and Mains programs for HPSC Prelims and HPSC Mains Exam preparation. Various Programs initiated by HPSC Notes are as follows:- For any doubt, Just leave us a Chat or Fill us a querry––