Sign up now
to enroll in courses, follow best educators, interact with the community and track your progress.
OBC Reservation Case
1,615 plays

Indira Sahawey vs Union of India - the appointment of Mandal Commission in accordance with article 340, Mandal Commission recommendations and Supreme Court judgement in Indira Sahawey case explained

Deepika Reddy Magham is teaching live on Unacademy Plus

Deepika Reddy Magham
BCA, LLB, MBA; Director, Shikara IAS Academy; 10 years experience in teaching Indian Polity, Ethics, Indian Society and Social Justice.

Unacademy user
mam apni profile pe topic wise exercise karwayiye plz apne kaha ta jan me
was It the commission that decides the creamy layer minimum income every yera
Manjeet singh
2 months ago
and 1 more I have seen people who are in OBC but not taking any accounting of creamy layer taking its benefits
hello mam...can I have some explanation on 1.golaknath 2.minerwamilss..3.indira sah waney..4.champakam doraorajan...what all these belongs to....In which lesson can I get these
I will create a course on the most important judgements of supreme court
okay mam
4A only cover SC/ST ... OBC don't have reservations in promotion?? also, what about consequential seniority-> is this also for SC/ST or SC/ST/OBC?
promotions and consequential seniority are both available only for SCs and STs because of Supreme Court ruling in Indira Sahawey case wherein the court stated that reservation is not applicable in promotions
madam please do one course on supreme court judgements
I will do that
God bless you mam your explanation is ultimate ...... please mam complete the entire polity series , thankyou

  2. OBC RESERVATION CASE Article 340 provides for the appointment of a commission by the President to investigate on to the conditions of the Backward Classes and make recommendations for their advancement.

  3. OBC RESERVATION CASE On the basis of Article 340 on 20th December 1978 under the Moraji Desai government appointed the second Backward Class Committee under the Chairmanship of B. P. Mandal. -

  4. OBC RESERVATION CASE The Commission submitted its report in 1980 in which it identified as many as 3743 castes as socially and economically backward classes. These castes constituted 52 per cent of the Indian Population. The Commission recommended reservation of 27% for BCs

  5. OBC RESERVATION CASE In 1991, the P.V. Narsimha Rao government implemented the recommendations by adding the following two provisions. i. Preference to the poorer sections among the BCs 11. Reservations of another 10% for economically backward sections of the Forward Castes who are not covered under the existing scheme of reservation.

  6. OBC RESERVATION CASE Indira Sahwey Vs Union of India The Supreme Court rejected the government's declaration to provide additional 10% Reservation for forward caste or OC.

  7. OBC RESERVATION CASE However it upheld the decision of 27% reservation for BCs on the following condition:s i)the advance section among Backward Classes (known as the creamy layer) should be excluded from the list of beneficiaries of reservation. ii) No reservations in promotions i.e., reservations should be confined to initial appointment only

  8. OBC RESERVATION CASE The SC also declared that - i) Carry forward rule in favour of SCs & STs shall be unconstitutional if the total per cent of reservations for that year exceeds 50 per cent ii) A permanent statutory body should be established to examine complains of over inclusion and under exclusion in the list of OBCs.

  9. OBC RESERVATION CASE Government measures: 1. Ram Nandan Prasad Committee - to identify the creamy layer among the Backward Classes 2. National Commission for Backward Classes- established under the National Commission for Backward Classes Act 1993 to look into cases of over inclusion and under exclusion in the list of OBCs.

  10. OBC RESERVATION CASE 3. Article 16(4A) 77th Constitutional Amendment Act 1995 empowers the state to make provisions for reservations in matters of promotions in jobs under the State in favour of SCs and STs which - - in the opinion of the state are not adequately represented.