NON-DISCRIMINATION ON

THE GROUND OF CASTE AS A

CONSTITUTIONAL POLICY

BY – SHIKHA MANIAR
BUSINESS LAW
36
 ARTICLES 17 AND 15(2)

17. “Untouchability” is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The
enforcement of any disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence
punishable in accordance with law
• Abolishes untouchability & punishable offence
• Not defined – constitution / act
• Imposition of social disability
• State of Karnataka vs. Appa Balu Ingale – water from a newly dug
up well
15 (2). No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or
any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard
to—
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained
wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
• the state and private persons
 ARTICLE 23 , 25(2) ,25 (1)

• 23. (1) Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labor
are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence
punishable in accordance with law.
• Relevance of prohibition
• Exploited – slaves & devadasi

• 25.(2) (b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu
religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
• Not allowed freedom of religion
• Not being allowed into temples – temple place of education
• 25. (1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of
this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right
freely to profess, practice and propagate religion.
• Policy of abolition of untouchability > religious freedom
 ARTICLES : 29(2),15(4),15(5)

• Article 29 (2)
• Prohibits denial of admission – educational institutions on the basis of only –
Religion , Caste , Language , Race or all ( by state or aided by state )

Article 15(4) ( 1st Constitutional Amendment act )

• The state has power – to made special provision – Advancement -
SEBC , SC , ST

• In the case of T.M.A Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka 2003 & P.A. Inamdar v.
State of Maharashtra 2005 SC held – no reservations for admission – Privately
run institutions .
• Therefore , Article 15(5) – 93rd constitutional amendment – scope of special
provision – extended – private educational institutions – aided / unaided .
 ARTICLES : 16(4),16(4-A),16(4-B)

• Article 16(4)- enables the state to make reservation in the matter of public
employment – backward class of citizens – opinion – state – not adequately
represented .
• Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India
Held –

Article 16 (4) is confined to only Reservation should not exceed 50% ,

appointments and is not applicable including backlog vacancy should not
to promotions exceed 50%

The Constitution (Seventy Seventh the Constitution (Eighty-first

Amendment) Act, 1995 added 16 Amendment) Act, 2000 added
(4-A) 16 ( 4-B)

Permission was granted to exceed

Reservation policy is extended to 50 % limit to fill up backlog
promotions with consequential vacancy of Sc and ST
seniority
 ARTICLES: 46 , 330 &332

• Article 46-
• promotion – educational ,economic interest – SC,ST,others
• Protection – social injustice & exploitation

• Articles 330 & art 332

• Reservation – House of People & state legislative assembly – SC & ST