Equality: A Principle Anew

Background

The concept of equality has been a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution since its inception. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees the right to equality for all citizens, prohibiting discrimination based on race, caste, religion, sex, place of birth, or any other ground. However, the interpretation of equality has been a subject of ongoing debate.

Landmark Supreme Court Judgment

In a recent landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of sub-categorization within Scheduled Castes (SCs) for the purpose of granting quotas. This decision has reignited the discussion on the nature and scope of equality in India.

Principle of Equality

Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, who authored the judgment, emphasized that the principle of equality guarantees factual, not formal equality. This means that the law can distinguish between groups if there is an "intelligible differentia" (a relevant and reasonable distinction) and a "rational relation" to the law's objective.

In the instant case, the court held that the sub-categorization of SCs for the purpose of quotas is valid because it seeks to address specific disadvantages faced by certain sub-groups within the SC community. The court also noted that the sub-categorization is based on objective criteria such as geographical location, occupation, and economic status.

Critics' Arguments

Critics of the judgment argue that it violates the fundamental principle of equality by creating further divisions within a marginalized community. They contend that quotas should be granted based on overall economic and social disadvantage, rather than caste or sub-caste.

FAQs

1. What is the basis for the sub-categorization of SCs?

The sub-categorization is based on objective criteria such as geographical location, occupation, and economic status.

2. How does the judgment justify sub-categorization?

The court held that sub-categorization is valid if there is an "intelligible differentia" and a "rational relation" to the law's objective. In this case, the objective is to address specific disadvantages faced by certain sub-groups within the SC community.

3. Does the judgment erode the principle of equality?

The judgment upholds the principle of factual equality, which allows for valid classification based on relevant distinctions.

4. How will the judgment impact quotas for SCs?

The judgment will ensure that quotas for SCs are distributed more equitably among different sub-groups within the community.

5. What are the implications for other marginalized groups?

The judgment may have implications for the sub-categorization of other marginalized groups, such as Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).