93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005

The Constitution of India is a living document that aims to secure justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity for all its citizens. One of the vital pillars of this vision is the affirmative action provided through reservations for socially and educationally backward classes. 

The 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005, is a landmark step in this direction. It empowers the State to make special provisions for the advancement of backward classes, not only in government institutions but also in private educational institutions, including unaided ones. 

Background and Historical Context of 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005

India’s social fabric is characterised by a complex caste system, which has historically marginalized certain communities. Recognising this, the Constitution originally included provisions to uplift Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) through reservations in educational institutions and public employment.

Early Provisions

Article 15(4), introduced by the First Amendment in 1951, permitted the State to make special provisions for the advancement of SCs and STs, particularly in educational institutions. However, this clause did not explicitly include admissions to private unaided educational institutions.

The Mandal Commission and OBC Reservation

In 1979, the Mandal Commission was established to identify Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and recommend measures to improve their status. The Commission’s report, submitted in 1980, recommended 27% reservations for OBCs in public sector jobs and state-run educational institutions. These recommendations were implemented in the 1990s but did not extend to premier central institutions or private educational institutions.

Judicial Limitations on Reservations in Private Institutions

In the early 2000s, the Supreme Court clarified the limits of the State’s power regarding reservations in private unaided institutions. The TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) and PA Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra (2005) rulings held that private unaided educational institutions, whether minority or non-minority, enjoyed autonomy under Article 19(1)(g) and could not be forced to implement State-imposed reservation schemes.

This created a constitutional hurdle in extending affirmative action to private institutions, which provide a significant share of professional education in India.

Genesis and Purpose of the 93rd Constitutional Amendment

To overcome this constitutional limitation, the Government of India introduced the 93rd Amendment in 2005. It added clause (5) to Article 15, empowering the State to enact laws making special provisions for admission of socially and educationally backward classes (OBCs), SCs, and STs in all educational institutions, including private unaided ones, except minority institutions.

The primary purpose of the Amendment was to broaden access to quality education, especially professional education, for disadvantaged groups, thereby fulfilling the directive principles enshrined in Article 46, which calls for the promotion of educational and economic interests of weaker sections.

The Amendment thus aimed to bridge the gap between government and private education sectors in terms of social justice and inclusion.

Text of Article 15(5)

The newly inserted Article 15(5) states:

“Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of Article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of Article 30.”

The clause clearly overrides any inconsistency with Articles 15(1) to (4) and Article 19(1)(g), which guarantees the freedom to carry on any occupation or profession.

Enactment of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006

Following the Amendment, the Parliament enacted the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, which extended 27% reservation for OBCs, 15% for SCs, and 7.5% for STs in central government educational institutions such as IITs, AIIMS, IIMs, NITs, and IISc.

The Act excludes minority educational institutions and central educational institutions established in tribal areas under the Sixth Schedule.

Landmark Judgements of 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005

Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008)

Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India was a landmark case challenging the constitutional validity of the 93rd Amendment and the 2006 Act. The petitioners argued that the Amendment violated the basic structure of the Constitution and the right to equality under Article 14.

The Supreme Court upheld the Amendment, stating that affirmative action is an essential feature of India’s constitutional framework. The Court introduced the concept of the “creamy layer,” excluding economically advanced members of OBCs (annual income exceeding ₹4.5 lakh) from availing reservation benefits. However, this exclusion does not apply to SCs and STs.

The Court held that the Amendment was consistent with the Constitution’s basic structure and the directive principles promoting social justice.

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India (2014)

The Supreme Court further reiterated that Article 15(5) empowers the State to enact reservation laws without violating fundamental rights, thereby strengthening the socialistic and egalitarian ideals of the Constitution.

Haryana Progressive Schools Conference v. Union of India (2008)

In this case, the Court clarified that laws enacted under Article 15(5) must strictly relate to admission and advancement of backward classes. Any attempt to use this power for other purposes could violate the freedom guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g).

Conclusion

The Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act, 2005, is a landmark in India’s constitutional and social history. By empowering the State to extend reservation benefits to private unaided educational institutions, it has expanded the scope of affirmative action and furthered the constitutional vision of an equitable society.

Though challenges in implementation and criticisms persist, the Amendment has stood the test of judicial scrutiny and continues to play a vital role in fostering educational opportunities for socially and educationally backward classes.