Indira Sawhney v Union of India: Landmark Judgement, Facts and Key Guidelines

Being a Law aspirant or a Law Student, it is important to study landmark judgments. This not only enhances the legal acumen but also explains how the courts work. The legal profession is full of uncertain events, but having an in-depth knowledge about the concepts and continuous learning can help you sail through this job easily.

Indira Sawhney v Union of India (Mandal Commission)

There is one important case, Indira Sawhney v. Union of India, which is also popularly known as the Mandal Commission. This judgement highlighted the significance of the reservation policy then prevailing in India. It is one of the important constitutional judgments, which highlighted the issues regarding the reservation policy on employment and education for backward classes. Article 16(4) of the Indian Constitution talks about the provisions related to the reservation policy. This article enables the States to make necessary norms for socially and educationally backward classes. Since such provisions allow the needy class of society to stand equivalent to others in terms of education, employment, etc., but such policies must ensure the balance in society.

Therefore, Indira Sawhney's judgment laid down the guidelines to be followed while implementing the reservation policy. The Mandal Commission case contributed to proposing the scope and extent of constitutional validity of 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

Indira Sawhney Case becomes one of the important cases to be studied while preparing for various national-level or state-level Law entrance exams such as AILET, AIBE, CLAT, MHCET Law, TS LAWCET, SLAT, etc.  

Indira Sawhney v Union of India: Key Highlights

The following are the key features of the Indira Sawhney Case:

• Landmark in Reservation Policy: This case laid down the framework for reservations in India, balancing favorable action with merit.
• Introduction of the Creamy Layer Concept: The Mandal Commission case aimed to help people and classes of people with reservations who genuinely need it.
• Judicial Precedent: This case became a judicial precedent and has been cited in many cases held later. Though there were many more cases on the reservation, the Indira Sawhney case remains a significant judgment.

Facts of the Indira Sawhney v Union of India Case

1. The Indian Constitution has provisions for seat reservations for the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs) in educational institutions, jobs, the legislature, etc.
2. Article 16(4) lays down and empowers the State to make provisions for the reservation for people belonging to the backward class.
3. In the year 1979, the Mandal Commission was set up, chaired by BP Mandal, also known as the Second Backward Classes Commission, to figure out the socially and educationally backward classes in India.
4. In the Mandal Commission, around 27% reservation was recommended in central government services for the OBC. However, the SC and ST candidates already had reservations.
5. In the year 1990, the memorandum for a 27% reservation in central government jobs was issued, but the decision faced backlash, and people protested across the country.
6. Many petitions were filed in the High Courts challenging the constitutional validity of the 27% OBC reservation.
7. All the cases were eventually transferred to be heard at the Supreme Court. The petition was heard by the largest bench in Indian Judicial history, a nine-judge Constitutional Bench.

What were the major issues before the Court?

The following were the major concerns to be decided by the court:

• What is the validity of the 27% reservation provision for OBCs, and whether it violates the principle of equal opportunity?
• What are the parameters to define the backwardness of a particular class of people?
• Should there be any limitations on reservations so that excessive quotas can be prevented?
• What is the validity of Article 16(4)? Whether it is an exception to the right to equality under Article 16(1) or merely an enabling provision?

Judgements in Indira Sawhney v Union of India Case

The guidelines were laid down in the Mandal Commission case by a nine-judge committee; however, the constitutional validity of the 27% OBC reservation provision was upheld:

1. On 16 November 1992, the nine-judge committee of the Supreme Court of India upheld the reservation by a 6:3 majority.
2. The Court held that as long as the OBCs are socially and educationally backward, the reservation for OBCs in government jobs is constitutional.
3. It was held that the Article 16(4) is not an exception but a significant aspect of Article 16(1). It therefore promotes the required equality among various classes.
4. In this case, the doctrine of ‘Creamy Layer’ was introduced. This led to the exclusion of socially advanced people in the OBC category from enjoying the benefits of reservation. This eventually led to making a disadvantaged group of people get the benefits of a reservation.
5. 50% Cap on Reservations: Another important decision made in this case was not to exceed 50% of the total seats or posts, except in extraordinary circumstances for reservation. It helped to maintain the balance of equality of opportunity.
6. Reservation cannot be based merely on economic criteria: In this case, it was ruled that economic criteria alone couldn’t be used to identify the backward classes.
7. No Reservations in Promotions: To enable equal opportunity to people belonging to the unreserved category, the Court held that Article 16(4) does not enable reservations in promotions. This provision only applies to initial appointments.
8. It was also decided that the inclusion and exclusion of groups in the OBC list will be subject to judicial review to ensure that no arbitrary inclusion is made in the list.
9. Through this judgement, the social justice was looked upon as part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and to achieve the same, reservation provisions are made balanced with efficiency and merit in public services.

Also Read: Legal Rights of Student in India: Rights and Laws Every Student Should Know