Question Description
The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect 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 The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect 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 The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect 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 The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. The Indian army has a special wing of rescue operations and it does not let women be a part of the wing. A case was filed in the court stating that they are discriminating on the basis of sex. They defended on the basis that they have differentiated an entire class of people and the entire class is not allowed to apply for this post so they have not discriminated. Have they violated the right to equality?a)Yes, they have violated the right to equality even though they created a differentiation.b)No, they have not violated the right to equality as they created a differentiation.c)They would not have violated the right to equality if along with the differentiation they had a reasonable nexus for the differentiation.d)Both A & CCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.