Consider the following statements: [2023]
Statement-I: The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India would be limited by Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of administration.
Statement-II: Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term ‘efficiency of administration’.
Poll Results
Please login to vote and see the results.
Statement 1 is accurate, as established by the Supreme Court in the M. Nagaraj case (2006), which introduced a threefold test to determine the validity of reservations in promotions: Demonstration of backwardness, Insufficient representation, and Assurance that such reservations do not compromise thRead more
Statement 1 is accurate, as established by the Supreme Court in the M. Nagaraj case (2006), which introduced a threefold test to determine the validity of reservations in promotions:
Statement 2 is incorrect. While Article 335 references “efficiency of administration,” it does not provide a formal definition for this term. The article states that the claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes must be considered while ensuring the maintenance of administrative efficiency during appointments to various services and positions within the Union or state governments. It further allows for provisions that may relax qualifying marks in examinations or lower evaluation standards for promoting reservations in public service roles related to the Union or state affairs.
Conclusion:
Statement I is correct, but Statement II is incorrect.
See lessLet's analyze the statements: Statement I: The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgments that reservation policies made under Article 16(4) would be limited by Article 335 to maintain the efficiency of administration. This is correct. The Supreme Court, in various rulings (such as the IndraRead more
Let’s analyze the statements:
Statement I:
The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgments that reservation policies made under Article 16(4) would be limited by Article 335 to maintain the efficiency of administration.
This is correct. The Supreme Court, in various rulings (such as the Indra Sawhney case), has emphasized that while Article 16(4) provides for reservations in public employment, it must be balanced with Article 335, which states that the claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes must be consistent with maintaining the efficiency of administration.
Statement II:
Article 335 defines the term “efficiency of administration.”
This is incorrect. Article 335 does not define “efficiency of administration.” It only mentions that the claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes should be taken into consideration, consistent with the maintenance of efficiency of administration. However, it does not provide a definition of “efficiency.”
Correct answer:
See lessStatement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect