M Nagaraj vs Union of India judgement




Nagaraj & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2006) 8 SCC 212 which upheld the constitutional amendments which inserted Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B), the Court had held that it is not mandatory for the State to make reservations for SC/ST in a matter of promotions.
What Was Held in M Nagaraj vs UOI

It also held that the Nagaraj judgment specified that the government must provide quantifiable data as regards backwardness is illegal and uncalled for due to the reason that the list only, after consideration by the President of India under arts. 341 and 342 are published and constitute SCs and STs.

This case comment attempts to analyse the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M. Nagaraj v. Union of India reported in AIR 2007 SC 71, which dealt with a pertinent and extremely contentious issue of providing reservation in promotions and examines the same in the light of various principles pertaining to Constitutional law, namely right to equality and fairness, equal opportunity, power of Parliament and its limitations thereof.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (hereinafter referred to as Supreme Court) on October 19, 2006, through a five-judge constitution bench, delivered a landmark judgment, concerning various issues vis the scope and magnitude of reservation of jobs in the public domain. The principle of right to equality, liberty, and life are some of the basic human rights guaranteed by birth and need no formal document like the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as Constitution) to ascertain them.

In a Country as ostentatious as India, entailing tremendous pluralism, humongous diversity, both ethnic and linguistic, which is known for its rich heritage also has a watermark on its collar in the form of a thousand-year-old practice of discrimination based on birth. The Varna system categorized humans based on the families they were born in and this led to a massive loss of human dignity in every form imaginable, which is intrinsic to every human being for an extremely long period, a period that cannot be calculated.

Reservation in Promotion

Reservation in promotion pertains to reservations granted to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs/STs) for promotions in public employment. It has been a bitterly contested issue between the Supreme Court and Parliament. In 1992 the Court, in its Indra Sawhney judgment, found that Article 16(4) does not allow for reservation in promotion. Then, between 1995 and 2000, Parliament enacted a series of Constitutional Amendments that legalized reservation in promotion. In 2006, the Court responded with its Nagaraj judgement, which placed strict conditions on when the State could grant an SC/ST reservation in promotion.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Justice ks Puttaswamy vs Union of India Citation

Image
  CASE NAME: K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD) V. UNION OF INDIA (AADHAAR JUDGEMENT) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 494 OF 2012. PETITIONER NAME : K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD). RESPONDENT NAME : UNION OF INDIA. DECIDED ON : 24TH AUGUST 2017. CITATION : 2017 10 S.C.C. 1. This article discusses Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) And Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors, which is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that constitutes the terrain for understanding the inter-relationship between the fundamental rights of the Indian Constitution and privacy. Article 14 of the Constitution of India In November 2017, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the right to privacy is a fundamental right of every person in the country under the Indian Constitution under Articles 14, 19, and 21. The court drew on past judgments, where the judiciary had carved out a limited right to privacy from within other rights like personal liberty (Article 21) and freedom of speech and expression (...
Read more

Shayara Bano vs Union Of India Case

Image
  On 22 August 2017, the Supreme Court took a landmark decision on the constitutional validity of “Talaq-e-Biddat” popularly known as “ Triple Talaq ” which is one of the three males initiated divorce in the Muslim community, the other two being “Talaq has an” and “Talaq hasan”. As the name suggests in this form of divorce, where a Muslim man can instantly divorce his wife after repeating the word “talaq” in one sitting, without any state intervention. Here the means of communication could be in any form i.e written, oral, or even electronic, which further enhances a woman’s vulnerability in this arbitrary and unilateral divorce1. This controversial custom given that it is an intersection between gender identity and community has unsurprisingly left Muslim women prone to abuse and in a morbid state, especially given the socio-economic aspect where most of the women are financially dependent on their spouse and the added fear of this whimsical divorce leaves many cases of marital ab...
Read more