The question asks about the requirements for the 'doctrine of reasonable classification' under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. While it prohibits discrimination, it does not mean that all persons must be treated identically in all circumstances. The doctrine of reasonable classification allows the state to treat different groups of people differently, provided there is a rational basis for such differentiation. This doctrine has been established and refined through various Supreme Court judgments.
C) The classification is based on intelligible differentia and the differentia has a rational nexus with the object of the law.
This option accurately describes the two essential conditions that must be satisfied for a classification to be considered reasonable under Article 14, as laid down by the Supreme Court of India. The 'intelligible differentia' means there must be a discernible basis for distinguishing between groups, and the 'rational nexus' means that this distinction must be logically connected to the purpose or objective of the law.
The question asks to identify which option is NOT an exception to Article 14 (Equality before Law). Article 14 states that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. However, there are certain constitutional and international exceptions to this principle. We need to evaluate each option to determine if it constitutes a valid exception or not.
D) Reservation in private unaided educational institutions for general category. This is NOT an exception to Article 14. Reservations are typically provided for disadvantaged groups (SC/ST/OBC/EWS) as a measure to achieve substantive equality, not for the general category. Such a provision for the general category would likely be challenged under Article 14 itself, as it does not fall under any recognized constitutional or international immunity/privilege.
The question asks to identify the Constitutional Amendment Act responsible for introducing reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). This requires knowledge of major constitutional amendments and their provisions.
D) 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019: This amendment introduced a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in admissions to educational institutions and government jobs. It inserted Clause (6) in Article 15 and Clause (6) in Article 16 of the Constitution, enabling the state to make special provisions for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens, including reservation in educational institutions and appointments in services under the State.
A) 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016: This amendment introduced the Goods and Services Tax (GST) in India. It is not related to EWS reservation.
B) 104th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019: This amendment extended the reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies for another ten years (until January 2030) and removed the reserved seats for the Anglo-Indian community in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.
C) 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018: This amendment granted constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) and defined its powers and functions. It is not related to EWS reservation.
The question asks to identify the Fundamental Right that is exclusively available to Indian citizens and not to foreigners. This requires knowledge of the specific Articles of the Indian Constitution that differentiate between citizens and non-citizens regarding fundamental rights.
Correct Option: A) Article 15 — Prohibition of discrimination. This Article prohibits the State from discriminating against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. This right is explicitly reserved for citizens of India.
The question asks to identify the constitutional amendment responsible for introducing reservation in promotion for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in government jobs. This requires knowledge of significant constitutional amendments related to reservation policies in India.
Correct Option: D) 77th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1995
The 77th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1995, inserted a new clause (4A) in Article 16 of the Constitution, empowering the State to make any provision for reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of posts in the services under the State in favour of SCs and STs, which in the opinion of the State are not adequately represented in the services under the State. This amendment was brought to overcome the Supreme Court's ruling in the Indra Sawhney case (1992) which stated that reservation in promotions was unconstitutional.
The question asks about a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India concerning reservation policies. Specifically, it refers to the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India case, also known as the Mandal Commission case, which set a crucial limit on the extent of reservations.
C) 50 percent — The Supreme Court, in the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) case, famously fixed the maximum ceiling for reservations at 50 percent.