Article 16

Equality of opportunity in
matters of public employment
GOLLA CHUSHMA CHOWDARY
B.COM LLB 3RD SEMESTER
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-1
ANUSHMITHA PRAMANIK
 INDEX
• Article 16
• Article 16(1)
• Article 16(4)
• Article 16(4)A
• History of Amendment
• Case laws
• Bibliography
 Article 16
• Article 16(1)
• “There should be equality of opportunity for all citizen In matters relating to
employment or appointment to any office under the state”
• TWO CONCEPTS:
1. Affirmative action – equalizing results with various actions
2. No discrimination – level playing
• Article 16(2)
• No citizen will ,on ground only of religion , race, caste, sex, descent, place of
birth, residence or any of them,
• Be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or
office under the state.
• Article 16(4)
• Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the
reservation of appointments or posts in favor of any backward class of citizens which,
in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State.
• Reservations may be made not only by statutes but also by the executive order.
• Indra Sawhney V. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477
• Reservation – separate quota for category
1. Vertical reservation- S.C / S.T / OBC / ……16(4)
2. Horizontal reservation- physically disable…16(1)
• Any backward class – wider than Art.15(4)
1. Identified on the basis of caste , occupation, poverty, social backwardness
• Article 16(4)A
• Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the
reservation.
1. In matters of promotion
2. In the service
3. In favour of SC and ST
• History of Amendment
• To over come the decision in Indra Sawhney case
1. “No reservation in promotion could be made in Article 16(4) and is confined to Initial
appointment only.”
The provision is only a enabling provision

M.R. Balaji V. State of Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649

• The classification is merely based on the caste .
• Art. 15(4) does not make classification between backward and more backward.
• Economical backwardness is yardstick to determine social backwardness.
• Art.15(4) is an exemption to Art. 15(1) .
• The fundamental Right of the rest of the society were to be completely ignored.
• For looking after the advancement of Backward classes , the state would be justified
in ignoring altogether advancement of rest of society.
• So maximum limit should not be more than 50%.
• T. Devdasan V. Union of India AIR 1964 SC 179
• Art. 16(4) is an exception to Art.16(1)
• A reasonable number is one which strikes the balance between claims of backward class and
other citizens.
• Carry forward rule is invalid.
• Dissenting Opinion
• “The idea of equality of opportunity in Art.16 is to provide special reference to deprived classes of citizen”.
• S.V. Balram V. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1972 SC 1375
• Supreme Court observed
• The commission prepared list not only on the basis of caste but also poverty ,occupation ,caste , and
educational backwardness
• So it is not violation of Art.15(4)
• State of Kerala V. N.M.Thomas AIR 1976 SC 490
• Art.16(4) is not exception to Art. 16(1)
• Article 16 being a facet of Doctrine of equality of Art. 14 which permits reasonable
classification.
• Criteria laid down by S.C
• The basis of classification has to be backwardness.
 Bibliography
• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/211089/
• https://www.constitutionofindia.net/constitution_of_india/16/article
s/Article%2016
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/right-to-equality-article-16-17-18/
• https://legalstudymaterial.com/article-16-of-indian-constitution/
• https://www.slideshare.net/vaibhavsonule/art-16-26972465
• https://www.academia.edu/17733315/Equality_Of_Opportunity_In_
Matters_Of_Public_Employment