Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on andquot;the overall efficiency of administrationandquot;. In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Passage - 5The Union government has called up...

Join the Discussion on the App

Passage - 5

The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were 'quantifiable data' to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).

It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the 'means test' to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the 'creamy layer' norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the 'creamy layer' category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the 'creamy layer'. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.

Q. Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the author's argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?

a)
Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.
b)
No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.
c)
Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.
d)
No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation won't affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Legal Reasoning - 1

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to f...

The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation with the given principle of law. You have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices.
Correct Answer is (d)
Only choice (d) assimilate the inference and the principle of law given. Questions talks about the reservation and says "Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes." Incorrect Answers
None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.
Choice (a) - Passage is completely silent about the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.
Choice (b) - There is nothing in the passage to support the argument about how the policy of EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation and its consistency with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution
Choice (c) - Given statement is inaccurate and inappropriate as nowhere the passage suggests reservation policy will not promote socioeconomic and political justice.

View all questions of this test

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities.This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were 'quantifiable data' to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the 'means test' to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the 'creamy layer' norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions.Most of them may not fall under the 'creamy layer' category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the 'creamy layer'. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q. Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution.This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the author's argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?

View answer

Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Under Article 235 of the Constitution of India, the administrative control over the members of district and subordinate judiciary in the States vest with the concerned High Court. Further, the State Government, in consultation with the High Court, frames the Rules and Regulations regarding the issues of appointment, promotion, and reservations etc. of Judicial Officers in the State Judicial Service. Therefore, Central Government has no role in this regard. Based only on the principle of law and argument identified by the author above, would such a reservation be valid if made by the Central Government?

View answer

The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities.This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were 'quantifiable data' to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the 'means test' to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the 'creamy layer' norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions.Most of them may not fall under the 'creamy layer' category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the 'creamy layer'. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q. Under Article 235 of the Constitution of India, the administrative control over the members of district and subordinate judiciary in the States vest with the concerned High Court. Further, the State Government, in consultation with the High Court, frames the Rules and Regulations regarding the issues of appointment, promotion, and reservations etc. of Judicial Officers in the State Judicial Service.Therefore, Central Government has no role in this regard. Based only on the principle of law and argument identified by the author above, would such a reservation be valid if made by the Central Government?

View answer

Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Teachers recruitment to Sainik School is strictly merit based through a competitive exam and medical fitness. It has been decided on 10th January, 2020 to have 27% reservation for SC/ST in admissions to align with the constitutional mandate. However, reservation in promotion to SC/STs are denied if they fall in creamy layer i.e. 10 lakh salary p.a. Based on the inference drawn, what should be the authors stand on the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation?

View answer

Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Based on the authors arguments in the passage above, which of the following statements is least inferential with respect to introduction of creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation made in the passage above?

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

CLAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CLAT

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Passage - 5The Union government has called upon the Supreme Court to form a seven-judge Bench to reconsider the formulation in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India (2006) that it should be applied to the SC and ST communities. This verdict was a reality check to the concept of reservation. Even while upholding Constitution amendments meant to preserve reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority; it contained an exposition of the equality principle that hedged reservation against a set of constitutional requirements, without which the structure of equal opportunity would collapse. These were quantifiable data to show the backwardness of a community, the inadequacy of its representation in service, and the lack of adverse impact on "the overall efficiency of administration". In Jarnail Singh (2018), another Constitution Bench reaffirmed the applicability of creamy layer norms to SC/STs. However, it ruled that Nagaraj was wrong to require a demonstration of backwardness for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, as it was directly contrary to the nine-judge Bench judgment in Indra Sawhney (1992).It is curious that Jarnail Singh accepted the presumption of the backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but favoured applying the means test to exclude from the purview of SC/ST reservation those who had achieved some level of economic advancement. While the Centre has accepted that the creamy layer norm is needed to ensure that only those genuinely backward get reservation benefits, it is justifiably upset that this principle has been extended to Dalits, who have been acknowledged to be the most backward among the backward sections. Another problem is the question whether the exclusion of the advanced sections among SC/ST candidates can be disallowed only for promotions. Most of them may not fall under the creamy layer category at the entry level, but after some years of service and promotions, they may reach an income level at which they fall under the creamy layer. This may result in the defeat of the object of the Constitution amendments that the court itself had upheld to protect reservation in promotions as well as consequential seniority. Another landmark verdict in the history of affirmative action jurisprudence may be needed to settle these questions.Q.Article 16(6) have been inserted in the constitution. This enables the State to provide the benefits of reservation on preferential basis to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWSs) in civil posts and services in the Government of India without adversely affecting the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Based on the authors argument and given information, will the EWS reservation adversely affect the SC/STs reservation?a)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since it has breached the limit of 50% limit of the reservation.b)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since it is consistent with the morality, philosophy and equality norms of the constitution.c)Yes, EWS reservation adversely affects the SC/ STs reservation since the policy will not promote socio-economic and political justice.d)No, EWS reservation will not adversely affect the SC/STs reservation since the reservation wont affect adversely the proportionate seats of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam