SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(SC) 192

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJI., D.A. DESAI, O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, A.P. SEN AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.
K.C. Vasanth Kumar and another, Petitioners
Versus
State of Karnataka, Respondent.
Writ Petns. Nos. 1297-98, 1407 of 1979, 4995-97 of 1980 and 402 of 1981, D/- 8-5-1985.
Versus
Mr. F. S. Nariman, Sr. Advocate, Mr. K. N. Bhat, Mr. B. Veerbhadrappa, Mr. H. S. Renuka Prasad, Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, Mr. Nanjappa Ganpathy, Mr. P.K. Manohar, Advocates with him for Petitioners in W. P. Nos. 1297-98 of 1979; Mr. K. Chennabasappa, Mr. S. S. Javali, Mr. B. R. Agarwal, Advocates for Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 1407 of 1979; Mr. K. K. Venugopal, Sr. Advocate and Mr. C. S. Vaidyanathan, Advocate for Petitioner in W.P. Nos.4995-97/80 and 402 of 1981; Mr. R.K. Garg, Sr. Advocate and Mr. A. V. Rangam, Advocate with him for, Respondents in W.P. Nos. 4995-97/80 and 402 of 1981; Mr. P. H. Parekh, and Mr. Gautam Philip, Advocates for Intervener Akhil Bharat Anusuchit Jati in W.P. Nos. 1297-98 of 1979. Mr. L.G. Havenur, Mr. K. M. K. Nair and Mr. Narayana Nettar, Advocates for Intervener President Karnataka Legislative in W.P. No. 1407 of 1979; Mr. K. Rajendra Chaudhary, Advocate for Intervener Dravida Kazhagam in W.P. No. 402 of 1981; Mr. K. M. K. Nair, Advocate for Intervener All India Nayaka Sangh in W.P. Nos 1297-98 and 1407 of 1979.

Advocates:
A.V.RANGAM, B.R.AGRAWAL, B.VIRBHADRAPPA, GAUTAM PHILIP, H.S.RENUKA PRASAD, K.CHENNABASAPPA, K.K.VENUGOPAL, K.M.NAYAR, K.N.BHATT, K.RAJENDRA CHAUDHARY, L.G.HAVANUR, NANJAPPA GANAPATHY, NARAYAN NETTAR, P.H.PARIKH, P.K.MANOHARAN, P.S.NARASIMHA, R.K.GARG, S.S.JAVALI, VIJAY VERMA

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Arts.14, 16, 15, 342, 336, 337, Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 - Sec. 2, 29(2), 46 - Marc Galanter Competing Equalities 1980 - Scheduled Castes - Scheduled Tribes - Backward Classes - learned Brethren have expressed their respective points of view on the policy of reservations which, alas. is even figuratively, a burning issue today. We were invited by the counsel not so much as to deliver judgments but to express our opinion on the issue of reservations, which may serve as a guideline to the Commission which the Government of Karnataka proposes to appoint, for examining the question of affording better employment and educational opportunities to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes. A somewhat unusual exercise is being undertaken by Court in giving expression to its views without reference to specific facts - But, institutions profit by well-meaning innovations – Held, learned Brethren have expressed their respective points of view on policy of reservations which, alas. is even figuratively, a burning issue today. We were invited by the counsel not so much as to deliver judgments but to express our opinion on the issue of reservations, which may serve as a guideline to the Commission which the Government of Karnataka proposes to appoint, for examining question of affording better employment and educational opportunities to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes - A somewhat unusual exercise is being undertaken by Court in giving expression to its views without reference to specific facts. But, institutions profit by well-meaning innovations - Facts will appear before the Commission and it will evolve suitable tests in the matter of reservations. I cannot resist expressing the hope that the deep thinking and sincerity which has gone into the formulation of the opinions expressed by my learned Brethren will not go waste

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) </ Key Points>

Question 1?

How to identify which groups constitute "backward classes" under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) and what criteria may be used?


Judgment

CHANDRACHUD, CJI. :- My learned Brethren have expressed their respective points of view on the policy of reservations which, alas. is even figuratively, a burning issue today. We were invited by the counsel not so much as to deliver judgments but to express our opinion on the issue of reservations, which may serve as a guideline to the Commission which the Government of Karnataka proposes to appoint, for examining the question of affording better employment and educational opportunities to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes. A somewhat unusual exercise is being undertaken by the Court in giving expression to its views without reference to specific facts. But, institutions profit by well-meaning innovations. The facts will appear before the Commission and it will evolve suitable tests in the matter of reservations. I cannot resist expressing the hope that the deep thinking and sincerity which has gone into the formulation of the opinions expressed by my learned Brethren will not go waste. The proposed Commission should give its close application to their weighty opinions. Mine is only a skeletal effort. I reserve the right to elaborate upon it, but the chances of doing so are not too bright.

2. I would state my opinion in the shape of the following propositions:-

1. The reservation in favour of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes must continue as at present, there is, without the application of a means test, for a further period not exceeding fifteen years. Another fifteen years will make it fifty years after the advent of the Constitution, a period reasonably long for the upper crust of the oppressed classes to overcome the baneful effects of social oppression, isolation and humiliation.

2. The meanstest, that is to say, the test of economic backwardness ought to be made applicable even to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes after the period mentioned in (1) above. It is essential that the privileged section of the underprivileged society should not be permitted to monopolise preferential benefits for an indefinite period of time.

3. In so far as the other Backward Classes are concerned, two tests should be conjunctively applied for identifying them for the purpose of reservations in employment and education : One, that they should be comparable to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the matter of their backwardness; and two, that they should satisfy the means test such as a State Government may lay down in the context of prevailing economic conditions.

4. The policy of reservations in employment, education and legislative institutions should be reviewed every five years or so. That will at once afford an opportunity (i) to the State to rectify distortions arising out of particular facets of the reservation policy and (ii) to the people, both backward and non-backward, to ventilate their views in a public debate on the practical impact of the policy of reservations.

DESAI, J. :-3. India embraced as a cardinal value against a background of elaborate, valued, and clearly perceived inequalities. Marc Galanter Competing Equalities 1980 Art. 14 guaranteed equality but the awareness of deep rooted inequality in the society reflected in Arts. 15 and 16. Fifteen months of the working of the Constitution necessitated amplification of Art. 15(3) so as to ensure that any special provisions that the State may make for the educational, economic or social advancement of any backward class citizen, may not be challenged on the ground of being scriminatory Objects and, Reasons Statement of the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. Sec. 2 thereof provided for addition to sub-art. (4) of Art. 15. For a period of three and a half decades, the unending search for identifying socially and educationally backward classes of citizens has defied the policy makers, the interpreters of the policy as reflected in statutes or executive/administrative orders and has added a spurt in the reverse direction,


















































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top