SEMINAR PAPER II

ASSIGNMENT NO. 2

THE MANDAL COMMISSION CASE AND AFTER EFFECTS IN INDIA

Submitted by

MD NAWAZISH KHAN

Roll no. 57

B.A.LL.B., II Semester.

Assignment Submitted to

Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University’s Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar

College of Law, Nagpur.

2022-2023

1
 INDEX

Particulars Page no.

A. LIST OF STATUES 3

B. LIST OF CASES 4

C. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 5

D. ABSTRACT 6

1. INTRODUCTION 6

2. Historical Background of Anti defection Law in India 7

3. The Anti Defection Act 1985 8

4. Following are the constitutional provisions 9

4.1. Case laws Related to Anti Defection law

5. Pros and Cons of Anti Defection law 11

4. Conclusion 12

5. Suggestion 13

E. BIBLIOGRAPHY 14

2
List of statues.
1. Constitution of India.
2. The Anti Defection Act,1985.
3. The 52nd Amendment Act,1985.

3
List Of Cases.
1. Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu and Others (1992) SCR (1) 686, 1992 SCC Supl. (2)
651.
2. Ravi S. Naik vs. Union of India (1994) AIR 1558, 1994 SCR (1) 754.
3. Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007) Appeal (civil) 765 of 2007
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA pp 1-24.
4. Manipur Legislative Assembly vs. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly and
Others (2020) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 548 OF 2020.

4
List of Abbreviations

.
1. ART Article
2. SCC Supreme Court Case
5. OBC Other Backward Class
7. SEBCs Socially & Educationally
Backward Classes

5
 Abstract

Keywords:

1. Introduction
The Mandal Commission case was an important legal case in India that had a big impact on
society and politics. It came about because people from lower castes and tribes were
demanding equal opportunities and social justice. So, the government set up the Mandal
Commission in 1979, led by B.P. Mandal, to investigate the conditions of socially and
educationally backward classes. The commission studied the social and economic situations
of these communities and made recommendations to improve their lives. One of the main
recommendations was to reserve 27% of government jobs and seats in educational
institutions for these socially and educationally backward classes, also called Other
Backward Classes (OBCs).
Implementing these recommendations sparked a lot of debate and controversy in Indian
society. Some people believed it was important to address historical injustices and provide
opportunities for the disadvantaged, while others opposed it, arguing for a merit-based
system and equal opportunities for everyone. The case eventually reached the Supreme
Court, which gave its verdict in 1992. The court upheld the idea of reservation but limited it
to 50% and introduced the concept of the creamy layer exclusion. This meant that the most
well-off individuals within the backward classes would not be eligible for reservation
benefits.
The Mandal Commission case had a profound impact on Indian society and politics. It led to
the expansion of reservation policies for OBCs in various areas and caused shifts in political
alignments. It also sparked discussions about the effectiveness of reservations, merit-based
selection, and the balance between affirmative action and equal opportunities.
Overall, the Mandal Commission case was a significant milestone in India's ongoing journey
towards inclusivity and social equality. It continues to shape policies and discussions related
to affirmative action and reservation in the country.
2. Historical background of anti defection law in india

The historical background of the anti-defection law in India can be traced back to the
turbulent political scenario in the 1960s and 1970s. During this period, there were frequent
instances of elected representatives switching political parties for personal gain or to

6
destabilize the government. Such political defections often resulted in the collapse of
governments, leading to political instability and hampering the functioning of democracy.

The need to address this issue and maintain political stability led to the inclusion of the anti-
defection provisions in the Constitution of India. The Tenth Schedule, also known as the
"Anti-Defection Law," was added to the Constitution in 1985 through the Fifty-Second
Amendment Act. The law has undergone interpretations and modifications through various
judicial pronouncements and amendments to address some of the concerns and loopholes. It
continues to be a subject of study, analysis, and ongoing discussions on its effectiveness and
scope in maintaining democratic values and preventing political defections in India.

Two main arguments have been put forward to support the implementation of an anti-
defection law. One justification for the law is its aim to address political defections driven by
corruption and bribery. Prior to the enactment of the anti-defection law, it was observed that
legislators were often enticed with promises of executive positions or personal benefits in
exchange for switching parties. A Committee led by the then Home Minister YB Chavan
(1969) was formed to examine the necessity of an anti-defection law. The committee found
that out of 210 legislators who defected in various states of India, 116 were offered
ministerial positions in the newly formed government they helped create. The committee
recommended that in cases where defections were motivated by financial gains or the allure
of political office, the defectors should not only be disqualified from holding office but also
barred from contesting future elections for a specified period of time.

Another argument in favor of the anti-defection law is that defections undermine the
mandate given by the voters. This argument stems from the understanding of the role of
political parties in a parliamentary system. According to this viewpoint, candidates are
primarily elected based on the party they represent. The party not only provides them with a
ticket but also supports them financially during the election campaign. Candidates run for
office based on the party's manifesto and the trust placed in them by the voters is based on
this affiliation. Therefore, when a member defects from their party, it is seen as a betrayal of
the fundamental trust on which the electorate elected them to power.

3. The Anti Defection Act 1985

The Anti-Defection Act refers to the legislation enacted by the Indian Parliament known as
the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India. It is commonly referred to as the "Anti-

7
Defection Law." The Anti-Defection Act was introduced in 1985 through the Fifty-Second
Amendment Act. The primary objective of the Anti-Defection Act is to address the issue of
political defections among elected representatives and to maintain stability in the democratic
system. It seeks to prevent elected members of legislative bodies from switching parties after
their election, thereby promoting party discipline, curbing political instability, and ensuring
the integrity of the electoral process.

Under the Anti-Defection Act, elected members can face disqualification if they voluntarily
give up the membership of their political party, vote or abstain from voting in the legislature
against the party's directives, or join another political party. The law applies to members of
both houses of Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) and state legislatures. The Act
provides for the disqualification of elected members upon the decision of the Speaker or the
Chairman of the respective legislative body, based on petitions or references filed by the
concerned political parties or members. The Speaker's decision on disqualification is subject
to judicial review, but limited to procedural irregularities and violations of natural justice.

4. Following are the constitutional provisions

Article 75(1A) states that the total number of Ministers, including the Prime Minister,
Council of Ministers shall not exceed fifteen per cent of the total number of members of the
House of the People.

Article 75(1B) states that a member of either House of Parliament belonging to any political
party who is disqualified for being a member of that House shall also be disqualified to be
appointed as a Minister for duration of the period commencing from the date of his
disqualification till the date on which the term of his office as such member would expire or
where he contests any election to either House of Parliament before the expiry of such period,
till the date on which he is declared elected, whichever is earlier.

102 (2) states that a person shall be disqualified for being a member of either House of
Parliament if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.

164(1A) states that the total number of Ministers, including the Chief Minister, in the Council
of Ministers in a State shall not exceed fifteen per cent of the total number of members of the
Legislative Assembly of that State.

8
164 (1B) states that a member of the Legislative Assembly of a State or either House of the
Legislature of a State having Legislative Council belonging to any political party who is
disqualified for being a member of that House shall also be disqualified to be appointed as a
Minister for duration of the period commencing from the date of his disqualification till the
date on which the term of his office as such member would expire or where he contests any
election to the Legislative Assembly of a State or either House of the Legislature of a State
having Legislative Council, as the case may be, before the expiry of such period, till the date
on which he is declared elected, whichever is earlier.

191 (2) A person shall be disqualified for being a member of the Legislative Assembly or
Legislative Council of a State if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.

361-(B) Disqualification for appointment on remunerative political post.

4.1. Case laws Related to Anti Defection law

4.1.1 Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu and Others (1992): This landmark case before the
Supreme Court of India established the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule
and clarified several aspects of the anti-defection law. The court held that the
Speaker's decision on disqualification under the anti-defection law is subject to
judicial review but limited it to procedural irregularities and violations of natural
justice.

4.1.2 Ravi S. Naik vs. Union of India (1994): In this case, the Supreme Court declared that
the decision of the Speaker or the Chairman of the House on disqualification under
the anti-defection law is final and cannot be challenged before any court.

4.1.3 Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007): The Supreme Court held that
if a legislator voluntarily gives up the membership of a political party by his conduct,
it will attract disqualification under the anti-defection law. The court clarified that the
giving up of membership must be a voluntary act and cannot be imposed by the party.

4.1.4 Manipur Legislative Assembly vs. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly and Others
(2020): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Speaker's inordinate delay in

9
 deciding disqualification petitions under the anti-defection law would amount to
abdication of duty and can be subjected to judicial review.

6. Conclusion

7. Suggestions

7.1. Impact on Education: Investigate how the recommendations of the Mandal Commission
affected education in India. Examine how reservations for OBCs influenced their access to
higher education, enrollment rates, and educational outcomes. Analyze the challenges and
advantages of implementing reservation policies in educational institutions.

Political Shifts: Explore the political consequences of the Mandal Commission case.
Investigate how the case influenced the emergence of regional political parties and alliances,
particularly those representing the interests of OBCs. Analyze the changes in power
dynamics and electoral strategies resulting from increased OBC political mobilization.

Socioeconomic Changes: Examine the socioeconomic transformations brought about by the

Mandal Commission case. Analyze the impact of OBC reservations on employment
opportunities, income levels, and social mobility for historically disadvantaged communities.
Assess the effectiveness of these policies in addressing socioeconomic inequalities.

Social Dynamics and Intercommunity Relations: Investigate the effects of the Mandal
Commission case on social interactions and relationships between different communities.
Analyze the tensions and conflicts that arose due to reservations and the ensuing debates.
Explore the role of media, public discourse, and social movements in shaping these
dynamics.

Meritocracy and Affirmative Action: Explore the ongoing debates surrounding meritocracy
and affirmative action in India. Assess the arguments supporting and opposing reservations,
considering ideas of equal opportunities, fairness, and the balance between merit-based
selection and affirmative action. Examine alternative models or policies proposed to address
social inequality.

10
Legal and Policy Framework: Analyze the legal and policy implications of the Mandal
Commission case. Explore subsequent court decisions and changes to reservation policies,
such as the concept of excluding the creamy layer. Assess the effectiveness and challenges of
implementing reservation policies within the framework of the Indian legal system.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARTICLES

1. Jagran josh. (2015,09,19). Retrieved from jagran josh :

https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/antidefection-law-1437126270

2. research,p.l.(2014,10,16).prsindia.Retrievedfromhttps://prsindia.org/files/parliament/
discussion_papers/Anti-Defection%20Law%20Intent%20and%20Impact_0.pdf

3. The International Journal of Law Management & Humanities

CASELAWS

1. Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu and Others (1992) SCR (1) 686, 1992 SCC Supl. (2)
651.
2. Ravi S. Naik vs. Union of India (1994) AIR 1558, 1994 SCR (1) 754.
3. Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007) Appeal (civil) 765 of 2007
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA pp 1-24.
4. Manipur Legislative Assembly vs. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly and
Others (2020) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 548 OF 2020.

11
WEBSITE

1. The Constitution (Fifty Second-Amendment) Act, 1985, available at

http://india.gov.in/govt/ documents/amendment/amend52.htm (Last visited on
September 17, 2011).

12