E.V. CHINNAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS INSC 682: Difference between revisions
(Supreme Court Of India Cases) |
(Cases) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Reservation must be considered from the social objective angle, having regard to the constitutional scheme, and not as a political issue and, thus, adequate representation must be given to the members of the Scheduled Castes as a group and not to two or more groups of persons or members of castes. | Reservation must be considered from the social objective angle, having regard to the constitutional scheme, and not as a political issue and, thus, adequate representation must be given to the members of the Scheduled Castes as a group and not to two or more groups of persons or members of castes. | ||
The very fact that the members of the Scheduled Castes are most backward amongst the backward classes and the impugned legislation having already proceeded on the basis that they are not adequately represented both in terms of Clause | The very fact that the members of the Scheduled Castes are most backward amongst the backward classes and the impugned legislation having already proceeded on the basis that they are not adequately represented both in terms of Clause of Article 15 and Clause of Article 16 of the Constitution of India, a further classification by way of micro classification is not permissible. Such classification of the members of different classes of people based on their respective castes would also be violative of the doctrine of reasonableness. Article 341 provides that exclusion even of a part or a group of castes from the Presidential List can be done only by the Parliament. The logical corollary thereof would be that the State Legislatures are forbidden from doing that. A uniform yardstick must be adopted for giving benefits to the members of the Scheduled Castes for the purpose of Constitution. The impugned legislation being contrary to the above constitutional scheme cannot, therefore, be sustained. | ||
For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned legislation apart from being beyond the legislative competence of the State is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and hence is liable to declared as ultra vires the Constitution. | For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned legislation apart from being beyond the legislative competence of the State is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and hence is liable to declared as ultra vires the Constitution. | ||
The appeals are allowed, impugned Act is declared as ultra vires the Constitution. | The appeals are allowed, impugned Act is declared as ultra vires the Constitution. | ||
[[Category: | <!-- | ||
NewPP limit report | |||
Cached time: 20240704174756 | |||
Cache expiry: 86400 | |||
Reduced expiry: false | |||
Complications: | |||
CPU time usage: 0.001 seconds | |||
Real time usage: 0.001 seconds | |||
Preprocessor visited node count: 1/1000000 | |||
Post‐expand include size: 0/2097152 bytes | |||
Template argument size: 0/2097152 bytes | |||
Highest expansion depth: 1/100 | |||
Expensive parser function count: 0/100 | |||
Unstrip recursion depth: 0/20 | |||
Unstrip post‐expand size: 0/5000000 bytes | |||
--><!-- | |||
Transclusion expansion time report | |||
100.00% 0.000 1 -total | |||
--><!-- Saved in parser cache with key aklcwuks_wiki-wiki_:pcache:idhash:248740-0!canonical and timestamp 20240704174756 and revision id 389266. Rendering was triggered because: edit-page | |||
--> | |||
[[Category:Cases]] | |||
Latest revision as of 23:18, 4 July 2024
Reservation must be considered from the social objective angle, having regard to the constitutional scheme, and not as a political issue and, thus, adequate representation must be given to the members of the Scheduled Castes as a group and not to two or more groups of persons or members of castes.
The very fact that the members of the Scheduled Castes are most backward amongst the backward classes and the impugned legislation having already proceeded on the basis that they are not adequately represented both in terms of Clause of Article 15 and Clause of Article 16 of the Constitution of India, a further classification by way of micro classification is not permissible. Such classification of the members of different classes of people based on their respective castes would also be violative of the doctrine of reasonableness. Article 341 provides that exclusion even of a part or a group of castes from the Presidential List can be done only by the Parliament. The logical corollary thereof would be that the State Legislatures are forbidden from doing that. A uniform yardstick must be adopted for giving benefits to the members of the Scheduled Castes for the purpose of Constitution. The impugned legislation being contrary to the above constitutional scheme cannot, therefore, be sustained.
For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned legislation apart from being beyond the legislative competence of the State is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and hence is liable to declared as ultra vires the Constitution.
The appeals are allowed, impugned Act is declared as ultra vires the Constitution.