Recent Landmark Case
Case Name Title Summary
Janhit Abhiyan v Union of EWS In a 3-2 majority, the Supreme Court upheld the
India Reservation 103rd Constitutional Amendment providing EWS
reservation. With this, the Court extended the net of
reservation benefits to include solely economic
backwardness.
Decided
Neil Aurelio Nunes v. constitutional The Supreme Court of India, upholding OBC
Union of India validity of OBC reservations in the All India Quota (AIQ) for PG and
reservations in UG medical and dental courses. The court ruled that
2021 PG NEET reservations are not at odds with merit and that
admissions they further its distributive impact.
The court rejected arguments that reservations are
detrimental to merit, and that specialized medical
degrees should be given based on merit alone. The
court also noted that exams do not reflect how
social, economic, and cultural advantages have
contributed to the success of certain classes
Jarnail Singh v Lacchmi States Key Issues
Narain Gupta Continue to The primary issues before the Court were:
Seek Clarity on 1. Mandatory or Enabling Provision:
Reservations Whether Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B) are
in Promotions mandatory provisions that require the state
to provide reservation in promotions for SCs
and STs, or whether they are enabling
provisions that allow the state to do so based
on certain conditions.
2. Conditions for Reservation: If the
provisions are enabling, what conditions must
the state meet to justify reservation in
promotions?
Court's Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the
amendments and held that Articles 16(4A) and
16(4B) are enabling provisions. This means that
the state is not obligated to provide reservation in
promotions for SCs and STs unless it meets certain
conditions.
The Court laid down the following conditions:
Backwardness: The state must demonstrate
that SCs and STs continue to suffer from
backwardness and inadequacy of
representation in the relevant service.
Quantifiable Data: The state must collect
quantifiable data to substantiate the claim of
backwardness and inadequacy of
representation.
Creamy Layer Exclusion: The state must
exclude the creamy layer within SCs and STs,
that is, those members who have achieved a
certain level of socioeconomic status
