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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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.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?a)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in targeting the rightful and legitimate beneficiaries of reservation.b)Author would welcome the creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it will help in excluding the individual who had been benefitting successively and including those who didnt benefit from the reservation historically.c)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation as it runs counter to the constitutional mandate of social justice and egalitarianism since SC/STs are most backward among the backward sections.d)Author would oppose creamy layer in the SC/ST reservation since it violates the affirmative action jurisprudence.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.