Article 16: Equality of Opportunity

Notes

Art. 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment to citizens.

Clauses

16(1): Equality of opportunity in public employment or appointment.
16(2): No citizen shall be discriminated against or be ineligible on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence.
16(3): Parliament may prescribe residence requirements for employment under a State or Union Territory (exception to 16(2)). Only Parliament can do this, not State legislatures.
16(4): Reservation for backward classes not adequately represented in State services.
16(4A): Reservation in promotions for SC/ST (77th Amendment, 1995).
16(4B): Carry-forward of unfilled reserved vacancies as a separate class, not counted against the 50% ceiling (81st Amendment, 2000).
16(5): Offices of religious or denominational institutions can be reserved for members of that religion.
16(6): 10% reservation for EWS in public employment (103rd Amendment, 2019).

Landmark cases

Indra Sawhney v Union of India (1992, Mandal case): upheld 27% OBC reservation; fixed 50% ceiling (except in extraordinary situations); introduced the creamy layer concept for OBCs; held reservation applies only to initial appointments, not promotions (later overridden by the 77th Amendment); held Art. 16(4) is not an exception but an instance of Art. 16(1).
M. Nagaraj (2006): upheld 77th, 81st, 82nd and 85th Amendments, subject to States collecting quantifiable data on backwardness, inadequacy of representation and administrative efficiency.
Jarnail Singh v Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018): creamy layer applies to SC/ST in promotions; States need not collect backwardness data for SC/ST but must show inadequate representation.
Mukesh Kumar v State of Uttarakhand (2020): reservation is not a fundamental right; States are not bound to provide it.
State of Punjab v Davinder Singh (2024): a 7-judge bench (6:1) held that States may sub-classify Scheduled Castes for reservation; overruled E.V. Chinnaiah (2005).
Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil (2021): Maratha reservation struck down; the 50% limit held binding. The 102nd Amendment (Art. 342A) was read to restrict States; the 105th Amendment (2021) restored States' power to identify SEBCs.

Mandal Commission: headed by B.P. Mandal (1979); report in 1980; recommended 27% OBC reservation; implemented by V.P. Singh government in 1990.

Key Points

Public employment only; citizens only.
Residence requirement can be set only by Parliament, under 16(3).
16(4A), 16(4B), 16(6) are the later additions.
50% ceiling and creamy layer both come from Indra Sawhney.
Reservation is an enabling provision, not a fundamental right (Mukesh Kumar, 2020).

MCQs

Q1. The 50% ceiling on reservation and the creamy layer concept were established in:
(a) Champakam Dorairajan
(b) M. Nagaraj
(c) Indra Sawhney
(d) Ashoka Kumar Thakur
Ans: (c).

Q2. Reservation in promotions for SC/ST was provided by which Amendment?
(a) 77th
(b) 81st
(c) 85th
(d) 93rd
Ans: (a). 77th Amendment (1995) added Art. 16(4A).

Q3. In State of Punjab v Davinder Singh (2024), the Supreme Court held that:
(a) Reservation is a fundamental right
(b) States can sub-classify Scheduled Castes
(c) Creamy layer cannot apply to OBCs
(d) EWS quota is unconstitutional
Ans: (b).