WITH THE VERDICT ON THE OBC QUOTA UPHOLDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF 27% RESERVATION, IT IS TIME TO LOOK BACK AT NOT JUST THE VALIDITY OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND THE MISUSE OF ARTICLE 368 BUT THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF.
The unanimous verdict by the five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court upholding the Constitution (93rd Amendment) Act 2005, which amended Article 15 held as not violative of the basic structure of the Constitution. The Court has also upheld the validity of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act 2006. In effect, the Court has upheld 27 per cent reservations for the OBCs while declaring that creamy layer should be excluded from the quota . This has paved way for immediate implementation of the OBC quota in the central institutions.
However, the decision on the OBC matter relied on the fact that the fundamental rights may not be abrogated but they can be abridged based on the landmark verdict of the Supreme court on the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973. As per the Law Lexicon, the legal encyclopedia , to abridge is to curtail or diminish ; to abrogate is to revoke or set aside.
Our Constitution is nothing but a cocktail of all the other Constitutions. They say for everything there has to be a perfect mixture of inspiration and perspiration. The British, US, Irish, Australian, French, Canadian, Russian and German Constitutions are said to be the inspiration behind the Indian Constitution. But the perspiration part is just missing.
On one hand, the very first lines of the Constitution speaks of Justice and Equality , but on the other hand , the legislature, with its powers on Article 368 made sure that State had the right to make any amendments to
Post a Comment to this article | << Back
For more information:
Telephone Us: 011-46081209, 011-64598338, 91-9891155057, 91-9868340420
Email Us: firstname.lastname@example.org