Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.

2018

SARDAR PATEL SUBHARTI

INSTITUTE OF LAW

CASE COMMENT

ON

JARNAIL SINGH V. LACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Ms. SHIVANI SHARMA TADAR RAVAN

Asst. Professor B.A.LL.B., III SEMESTER

ENROLLMENT NO:1805000020047

1
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018
SWAMI VIVEKANAND SUBHARTI UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the very outset, I would like to pay thanks to the almighty God. I give me immense
pleasure to acknowledge and pay thanks, which helped me throughout the course of my work. I
am really thankful to our respected subject teacher Ms. Shivani Sharma, Assistant prof. Sardar
Patel Subharti Institute of Law, Swami Vivekananda Subharti University.

Secondly I would like to thanks to my Principal and Dean of Law, all teachers, and my parents
who helped me a lot in finalizing this project within the limited time framed.

Tadar Ravan

B.A. LL.B. III rd Semester

2
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

INDEX

Page no.

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………… 4
2. Historical Background…………………………………………………………5
3. Facts of the Case……………………………………………………………….7
4. The Case Overview……………………………………………………………8

 The Case
 The Bench
 The Date of Judgment
 Parties involved
 Statutes involved
 Cases referred
 Counsels Appeared

5. Issues Raised……………………………………………………………………10

6. Comment.……………………………………………………………………….11

7. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………15

8. Bibliography……………………………………………………………………17

3
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

INTRODUCTION

The present case relates to the subject of Reservation of SC/STs in Government jobs and is the
most leading case out of all, relating to the ‘Reservation Quota’. Reservation is one of the most
alarming degradation issues which the society facing the problem at present scnerio. They are
provided in two levels of state in India: - Central Government jobs and state government jobs.

 Central Government jobs posts and services. Reservation in public educational

institutions and government jobs is usually, at most, 50 per cent.
 State Government jobs 22.5% of available seats are reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) and
Scheduled Tribe (ST) students (7.5% for STs, 15% for SCs). This reservation percentage
has been raised to 49.5% by including an additional 27% reservation for OBCs.

The general legal position all over the India seems to be that Reservation is not
beneficial for present circumstance. It may effect in various ways including higher educated
person who are belong to general category. He fails in the competitive exams due to reserve seats
in our India.

This court, in this case, is facing the alarming The writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India has been filed on the behalf of appellant Arjun Gopal and others by three
infants who are made appellants in Digitally Signed by Sushil Kumar Rakheja, claming to be a
next friend.

The present case is a writ petition under Article 16 of the Constitution, and has

been filed on behalf of the petitioner Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta by

Jarnail Singh.

4
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

According to me it can be seen that when seats are to be reserved in the House of the
People for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the test of proportionality to the population
is mandated by the Constitution and has wisely left the test for determining adequacy of
representation in promotional posts to the States for the simple reason that as the post gets higher,
it may be necessary, even if a proportionality test to the population as a whole is taken into account,
to reduce the number of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotional posts, as one goes
upwards. This is for the simple reason that efficiency of administration has to be looked at every
time promotions are made.

The concepts of efficiency, backwardness and inadequacy of representation are required

to be identified and measured. That exercise depends on the availability of data. That exercise
depends on numerous factors. It is for this reason that the enabling provisions are required to be
made because each competing claim seeks to achieve certain goals. How best one should optimize
these conflicting claims can only be done by the administration in the context of local prevailing
conditions in public employment.

Instead of leaving it to the States to determine on a case to case basis whether the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes are adequately represented in any class or classes of
posts in the services under the State, the substituted provision does not leave this to the discretion
of the State, but specifies that it shall be to the extent of the percentage of reservation provided to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the services of the State. This amendment was
necessitated because a Division Bench of this Court in U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. (supra) had
struck down Section 3(7) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 and Rule 8A of the U.P. Government
Servants Seniority Rules, 1991, which read as under.

Promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes

and other weaker sections.—The State shall promote with special care the educational and
economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of

5
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018
exploitation.‖ This being the case, it is easy to see the pattern of Article 46 being followed
in Article 16(4) and Article 16(4-A). Whereas ―backward classes‖ in Article 16(4) is equivalent
to the ―weaker sections of the people‖ in Article 46, and is the overall genus, the species of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is separately mentioned in the latter part of Article
46 and Article 16(4-A).

This is for the reason, as has been pointed out by us earlier, that the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes are the most backward or the weakest of the weaker sections of society, and
are, therefore, presumed to be backward. Shri Dwivedi’s argument that as a member of a Scheduled
Caste or a Scheduled Tribe reaches the higher posts, he/she no longer has the taint of either
untouchability or backwardness, as the case may be, and that therefore, the State can judge the
absence of backwardness as the posts go higher, is an argument that goes to the validity of Article
16(4-A). If we were to accept this argument, logically, we would have to strike down Article 16(4-
A), as the necessity for continuing reservation for a Scheduled Caste and/or Scheduled Tribe
member in the higher posts would then disappear.

6
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

FACTS OF THE CASE

 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 (4) of Article
15 and clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution, a further classification by way
of micro- classification is not permissible
 That the claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency
of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection
with the affairs of the Union or of a State.
 That the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes are the most backward among
backward classes and it is, therefore, presumed that once they are contained in the
Presidential List under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India
 That the decision in Nagaraj (supra) would have the effect of amending the
Presidential Order relating to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which would
violate Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India, as Parliament alone can
amend a Presidential Order.
 That even if it be conceded that creamy layer can fall within Articles 341 and 342,
yet the Court’s power to enforce fundamental rights as part of the basic structure
cannot be taken away.
 That the ceiling limit of 50%, the concept of creamy layer and the compelling
reasons, namely, backwardness, inadequacy of representation and overall
administrative efficiency are all constitutional requirements without which the
structure of equality of opportunity in Article 16 would collapse.

7
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

THE CASE OVERVIEW

THE PRESENT CASE:

Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta AIR 16 September, 2018

Writ Petition (CIVIL) No. 30621 Of 2011

THE BENCH:

 Justice Dipak Misra

 Justice Kurian Joseph
 Justice R.F. Nariman
 Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul
 Justice Indu Malhotra

THE DATE OF JUDGEMENT:

26, September 2018

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Petitioner – Jarnail Singh & others

Respondent – Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Others

STATUTES INVOLVED:

 The Constitution of India 1950.

 Other Backward Classes Act, 1994

CASES REFERED:

 M. Nagaraj v. UOI & Ors

 Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
 R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab
 E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of A.P

8
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018
 Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay North
 Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain & Anr
 Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India
 Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. State of Bihar
 M. Nagaraj v. Union of India
 State of Kerala & Anr. v. N.M. Thomas and Ors
 . Anil Chandra v. Radha Krishna Gau
 Suraj Bhan Meena & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors
 U.P. Power Corporation v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors

COUNSELS APPERED:

 Constitutional Provisions Governing Reservation in India

 Judicial Scrutiny of Reservation

9
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

THE ISSUES RAISED

 Whether the impugned Act is violates of Article 341(2) of the Constitution of India?
 Whether the impugned enactment is constitutionally invalid for lack of legislative
competence?
 Whether the impugned enactment creates sub classification or micro-classification of
Scheduled Castes so as to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India?
 whether the constitutional limitations on the amending power of Parliament are
obliterated by the impugned amendments so as to violate the basic structure of the
Constitution.
 Whether to have a reservation/quota system or not is still a debatable question in India.

10
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

THE COMMENT

“If you believe in living a respectable life, you believe in self-help which is the
best help”

Dr. BR Ambedkar….

According to me, all the Reservation should be banned and also Reservation seat policy
should be abolished from the Country. In present scenario this policy has not needed in our country
because if these Reservation is going own in India all the Student Will Suicide their life when
they don’t get their Goal. The case before us a petition under Article 16(4) of The Constitution
and has been filed on the behalf of the petitioner Jarnail Singh.

Only such classes of citizens who are socially and educationally backward are qualified
to be identified as backward classes. To be accepted as backward classes for the purpose of
reservation under Article 15 or Article 16, their backwardness must have been either recognized
by means of a notification by the President under Article 341 or Article 342 declaring them to be
Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, or, on an objective consideration, identified by the State
to be socially and educationally so backward by reason of identified prior discrimination and its
continuing ill effects as to be comparable to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes. In the
case of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, these conditions are, in view of the
notifications, presumed to be satisfied.

 Reservation in state services led to divisions and enmity among government employees,
vitiating the atmosphere at workplace.

 Eradication, not perpetuation of caste was the objective of the reservation policy but Caste Based
Reservation only perpetuate the notion of caste in society.

 Reservation was introduced to ensure that the historically underprivileged communities were
given equal access to resources but irrespective of the economic progress they continue to
remain socially disadvantaged.

11
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018
 Reservation destroys self-respect, so much so that competition is no longer on to determine the
best but the most backward.

 Reservations are the biggest enemy of meritocracy which is the foundation of many progressive
countries.

 It has become a tool to meet narrow political ends through invoking class loyalties and
primordial identities.

 The dominant and elite class within the backward castes has appropriated the benefits of
reservation and the most marginalised within the backward castes have remained marginalised.

This was followed by an Office Memorandum of 25.09.1991, by which, within the 27% of
vacancies, preference was to be given to candidates belonging to the poorer sections of the
Socially and Economically Backward Classes; and 10% vacancies were to be reserved for Other
Economically Backward Sections who were not covered by any of the existing schemes of
reservation. The majority judgments upheld the reservation of 27% in favour of backward
classes, and the further sub-division of more backward within the backward classes who were
to be given preference, but struck down the reservation of 10% in favour of Other Economically
Backward categories.

We do not think the principles laid down in Indra Sawhney case (supra) for sub
classification of Other Backward Classes can be applied as a precedent law for sub classification
or subgrouping Scheduled Castes in the Presidential List because that very judgment itself has
specifically held that subdivision of Other Backward Classes is not applicable to Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes. This we think is for the obvious reason i.e. the Constitution itself has kept
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes List out of interference by the State Governments.

After independence the very essence of including reservation in our constitution by Dr.
B.R.Ambedkar was to curb the social evils and bring equality in the society by providing special

rights to the down-trodden classes like SC’s , ST’s ,BC’s and women for e.g. abolition of
untouchability and article 15.

12
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018
But today with the changing scenario, reservation has become a part of politics and not a
matter of right to secure social solidarity. Political leaders just in the greed of votes and stability
are using this sensitive issue as a weapon.

If each and every caste will demand reservation, then there will be nothing like a general
class and everyone will be in a reserved class which in turn will abolish reservation or just join
hands together to curb red tapism and corruption existing in the present system and work hard to
show your abilities in such a manner that inspite of reservation one may stand in a distinct position
because even the reservation is not reaching to the one who really need reservation.

According to present status of Reservation in India: -

After introducing the provision for reservation once, it got related to vote bank politics and

the following governments and the Indian Parliament routinely extended this period, without any

The Supreme Court ruling that reservations cannot exceed 50% (which it judged would violate

equal access guaranteed by the Constitution) has put a cap on reservations. The central government

of India reserves 27% of higher education, and individual states may legislate further reservations.

Reservation in most states is at 50%, but certain Indian states like Rajasthan have proposed a 68%
reservation that includes a 14% reservation for forward castes in services and education.

However, there are states laws that exceed this 50% limit and these are under litigation in

the Supreme Court. For example, the caste-based reservation fraction stands at 69% and is
applicable to about 87% of the population in the state of Tamil Nadu.

The issue of reservation has remained a cause of disagreement between the reserved and

the non- reserved sections of the society. While the unreserved segments, keep on opposing the

provision, the neediest sections from within the reserved segments are hardly aware about how to
get benefited from the provision or even whether there are such provisions.

On the contrary, the creamy layer among the same segment is enjoying special privileges in the

name of reservation and political factions are supporting them for vote banks. Reservation is no
13
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

doubt good, as far as it is a method of appropriate positive discrimination for the benefit of the

downtrodden and economically backward Sections o, the society but when it tends to harm the

society and ensures privileges for some at the cost of others for narrow political ends, as it is in the
present form, it should be done away with, as soon possible.

 The reservation benefits should flow to the vast majority of underprivileged children from
deprived castes; not to a few privileged children with a caste tag.
 High ranks official’s families, high income professionals and others above a certain income
should not get the reservation benefits especially in government jobs.
 Fair and practical ways to help needy person from each community through reservation is
possible and necessary.
 The process of reservation should filter the truly economically deprived individuals and bring
them all to justice
 Revolutionary changes in the education system at the grass-roots level is need of the hour.
 There is also need for awareness generation because while the unreserved segments, keep on
opposing the provision, the neediest sections from within the reserved segments are hardly
aware about how to get benefited from the provision or even whether there are such provisions
exists.
 The radical solutions like excluding the entire creamy layer among all castes from reservation
and developing their capabilities instead of offering them reservation for admission to higher
education or jobs on a platter.

14
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

CONCLUSION

Question such as these, involved in the present case, come up at times in the course of
Reservation quota. We realize that answers to these questions are difficult, and involve several
quota seats. Our opinion is based on the reservation quota facts.

The court set aside the requirement to collect quantifiable data that was stipulated by its 2006 verdict
in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India as it ignored the reasoning of a nine-judge bench in Indra
Sawhney (1992) that any discussion on creamy layer “has no relevance” in the context of SC/STs.

The court has taken more than a decade to correct an anomaly in the Nagaraj case which brought in a
creamy layer filter for promotions for SC/ST employees. This resulted in thousands of employees being
denied their due promotions.

The judgment of the Supreme Court in this which confirmed the application of creamy layer to
promotions for SC/ST government employees as held in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India, showed
the meagre understanding of the nature of caste discrimination in institutions.

While on one hand, the judgment held Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B) to be valid, which allows for
reservations in promotions, on the other, it effectively neutralized this benefit by applying the creamy
layer restriction. If the current creamy layer ceiling of Rs 8 lakh per annum were to be applied, even
‘Group D’ SC/ST employees would be barred from reservations. Like a deft magician, the court has
performed a sleight of hand on reservation in promotions –given it by one hand and taken it away by
another hand.

Other Backward Communities, as backward and more backward based on their comparative
underdevelopment, therefore, the similar classification amongst the class enumerated in the
Presidential List of Scheduled Castes is permissible in law. We do not think the principles laid
down in Indra Sawhney case (supra) for subclassification of Other Backward Classes can be
applied as a precedent law for subclassification or subgrouping Scheduled Castes in the
Presidential List because that very judgment itself has specifically held that subdivision of Other
Backward Classes is not applicable to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This we think is

15
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

for the obvious reason i.e. the Constitution itself has kept the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes List out of interference by the State Governments.

According to my point of view, Reservation seat policy should be abolished. In present

scenario this policy has not needed in our country. Main loss of the people who are belongs to General
category. He plays a hard work in our life but due to Quota policy he fails our achievement. Many
students are died in every day due to not achieve target.

The system of reservation in India comprises a series of measures, such as reserving

access to seats in the various legislatures, to government jobs, and to enrollment in higher
educational institutions. The reservation nourishes the historically disadvantaged castes and tribes,
listed as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs) by the Government of India and
also those designated as Other Backwards Classes (OBCs). The reservation is undertaken to
address the historic oppression, inequality and discrimination faced by those communities and to
give these communities a place. It is intended to realize the promise of equality enshrined in
the Constitution.

Reservation in Indian law is a form of affirmative action whereby a percentage of seats

are reserved in the public sector units, union and state civil services, union and state government
departments and in all public and private educational institutions, except in the religious/ linguistic
minority educational institutions, for the socially and educationally backward communities and
the Scheduled Castes and Tribes who are inadequately represented in these services and
institutions. The reservation policy is also extended for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
for representation in the Parliament of India.

16
 Jarnail Singh Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta.
2018

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

BOOKS REFERED:

V.N. SHUKLA, The Constitution of India, thirteenth Edition, Eastern Book.

J.J.R. Upadhyay, Environmental Law, Central Law Agency.

DICTIONARIES REFFERED:

Oxford Dictionaries.

STATUTES REFERED:
https://indiankanoon.org

ARTICLES REFERED:

 DRISHTI IAS Article based on the Reservation

 Article 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution enabled the State and Central Governments
to reserve seats in government services for the members of the SC and ST.

17