Also, the Constitution has been amended in 2018 to introduce Article 342A under which the President notifies, in consultation with the States, the list of Backward Classes, with a caveat similar to the ones in respect of Scheduled Castes (Article 341) and Scheduled Tribes (Article 342) that Parliament can make inclusions or exclusions in this list, and that once such a change is notified, “it shall not be varied by any subsequent notification”. What is the effect of this? The Court says it could mean that just as the BC list can be divided into ‘backward’ and ‘more backward’, the same could be done among SCs too.
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"
Unknown titlehe Bench has disagreed with the formulation in E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004) that classifying Scheduled Castes into groups amounts to ‘tinkering’ with the Presidential list. <span>Also, the Constitution has been amended in 2018 to introduce Article 342A under which the President notifies, in consultation with the States, the list of Backward Classes, with a caveat similar to the ones in respect of Scheduled Castes (Article 341) and Scheduled Tribes (Article 342) that Parliament can make inclusions or exclusions in this list, and that once such a change is notified, “it shall not be varied by any subsequent notification”. What is the effect of this? The Court says it could mean that just as the BC list can be divided into ‘backward’ and ‘more backward’, the same could be done among SCs too. As E.V. Chinnaiah is also a verdict by a Bench with a strength of five, the matter has been referred to a larger Bench. If the judgment is reconsidered, it would provide welcome relief Summary
status | not read | | reprioritisations | |
---|
last reprioritisation on | | | suggested re-reading day | |
---|
started reading on | | | finished reading on | |
---|
Details