Article 15 of the Constitution of India

Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This article ensures equality before the law and prohibits any form of discrimination in public access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, and places of public entertainment. It also prohibits any form of discrimination in employment or the use of public resources.

In this article, we will delve into the various subclauses of Article 15 and the landmark judgments passed by the Supreme Court of India to understand the scope and impact of this fundamental right.

What is Article 15 of the Constitution of India?

Article 15 of the Constitution of India prohibits discrimination against any citizen on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. The article states that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on these grounds and also empowers the State to make special provisions for women and children and for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

The article prohibits discrimination in matters related to access to public places such as shops, restaurants, hotels, and places of public entertainment. It also prohibits discrimination in matters related to employment, education, and the use of public utilities such as wells, tanks, and bathing ghats.

The objective of Article 15 of the Constitution of India

The objective of Article 15 is to promote equality and eliminate discrimination on the basis of various factors that historically have been the basis of social inequality and injustice in India.

Provisions of Article 15 Indian Constitution

“(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

 (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to—

     (a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or

     (b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.

(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.

(4) Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.

(5) 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.

(6) Nothing in this article or sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 or clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making,—

     (a) any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5); and

     (b) any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5) 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, which in the case of reservation would be in addition to the existing reservations and subject to a maximum of ten per cent. of the total seats in each category.

     Explanation.—For the purposes of this article and article 16, “economically weaker sections” shall be such as may be notified by the State from time to time on the basis of family income and other indicators of economic disadvantage.”

Article 15 (1) of the Constitution

Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India states that the State, which includes the government and its institutions, shall not discriminate against any citizen based solely on religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

This means that the State cannot treat individuals or groups differently or unfairly based on these grounds. For example, the State cannot deny an individual a job, admission to an educational institution, or access to public services, solely based on their religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

DP Joshi v. State of Madhya Bharat 

DP Joshi v. State of Madhya Bharat is a landmark case in Indian constitutional law that deals with the interpretation of Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution.

In this case, the petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of an order issued by the State of Madhya Bharat, which provided for the reservation of seats in medical and engineering colleges for candidates from backward classes. The petitioner argued that the order violated Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, upheld the constitutional validity of the reservation order. The Court held that Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on the grounds mentioned above, but it does not prohibit the State from making special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens. The Court further held that the reservation order was a special provision aimed at promoting the educational advancement of the backward classes and was, therefore, valid under Article 15(1).

The Court also observed that the classification of backward classes for the purpose of reservation must be based on objective criteria such as social and educational backwardness, and not solely on the basis of caste. Additionally, the Court held that the reservation policy must be based on the needs of the society and should be flexible enough to accommodate changing social and economic conditions.

State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Singh

In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Singh (1969), the Supreme Court dealt with the issue of discrimination based on residence. The case involved a rule made by the Rajasthan government that only the candidates who had been residents of the state for a certain period of time would be eligible for admission to medical colleges in the state.

The court held that the government’s rule violated Article 15(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. The court held that the rule was discriminatory as it excluded non-resident candidates from consideration, irrespective of their merit. 

The court further held that the rule was not covered under the exception provided in Article 15(3), which allows the state to make special provisions for women and children.

The court held that the right to equal opportunity in the matter of education cannot be limited by any discrimination based on residence. The court observed that the purpose of education is to create a pool of skilled individuals who can serve society and the nation as a whole. The court held that it is in the larger interest of society and the nation to admit the best candidates, irrespective of their residence.

Article 15 (2) of the Constitution

Article 15(2) of the Constitution of India is a fundamental right that prohibits discrimination against any citizen of India solely based on religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them. The provision prohibits any citizen from being subjected to any disability, liability, restriction, or condition on these grounds.

Clause (a) of Article 15(2) specifically prohibits discrimination in access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, and places of public entertainment. This means that no citizen can be denied entry or services at these establishments on the basis of their religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

Clause (b) of Article 15(2) prohibits discrimination in the use of public facilities such as wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads, and places of the public resort that are maintained either wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public. 

This means that no citizen can be denied access to these public facilities on the basis of their religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

Article 15 (3): Special Provisions for women and children

Article 15(3) of the Constitution of India is a provision that allows the State to make special provisions for women and children, despite the general prohibition on discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them under Article 15(1).

The provision recognizes that women and children have historically been disadvantaged and marginalized due to various social and economic factors, and hence, require special provisions to promote their welfare and advancement.

Article 15(3) permits the State to make such special provisions without violating the fundamental right to equality guaranteed to all citizens. 

These special provisions may include policies and programs that aim to uplift women and children, such as reservations in educational institutions, employment opportunities, and healthcare facilities, as well as protection against various forms of discrimination and violence.

Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay

In Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay (1954), the appellant was charged with adultery under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case raised the issue of whether Section 497 was in contradiction with Articles 14 and 15 of the Indian Constitution.

 The argument was made that Section 497 stated that only men could commit adultery and that women could not be punished as abettors, which raised questions of discrimination based on gender.

However, it was noted that Clause (3) of Article 15 allows the state to make special provisions for women and children, indicating that the provision was not intended to prevent such provisions. It was also argued that Article 15(3) should not be interpreted as shielding women from crimes.

Moreover, the appellant was not an Indian citizen, and only Indian citizens can invoke fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 15. As a result, the appeal was dismissed.

Paramjit Singh v. State of Punjab

In the case of Paramjit Singh v. State of Punjab (2009), the petitioner was elected as a Panch for a reserved seat for women of Scheduled Castes. The petitioner challenged the election of respondent number 5 as Sarpanch, claiming that she was not eligible to contest for the reserved seat for Scheduled Castes (women) as she was elected only as a Panch for a reserved seat for Scheduled Castes (women).

The court held that if the seat of the Sarpanch for a village was reserved for Scheduled Castes, then both men and women belonging to those categories could stand for election for the Sarpanch’s post. The eligibility criterion was being a Scheduled Caste and representing the constituency as Panch. Therefore, the election of respondent number 5 as Sarpanch was held valid.

Article 15 (4): Special provision for SEBCs, or SCs & STs

Article 15(4) of the Indian Constitution allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes. This provision overrules any potential conflict between the fundamental right against discrimination and any affirmative action programs implemented by the government to address historical social and educational disadvantages.

This means that the State can implement programs, policies, and laws that provide preferential treatment to disadvantaged communities based on their caste, tribe, or economic status, without violating the anti-discrimination provisions of Article 15(2) or Article 29(2). 

These provisions can include reservations in education, employment, and political representation, as well as other programs aimed at addressing social and educational inequalities faced by these groups. 

The aim of such special provisions is to help these communities to have access to opportunities and resources that were denied to them in the past, and to bring them to par with the rest of society.

The reason for adding this clause is linked to two significant instances.

Firstly, in the case of the State Of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam (1951), the government of Madras issued an order that allocated seats in medical and engineering colleges based on the caste and community of the students. 

However, the seven-judge bench declared that the order was against Clause (1) of Article 15 of the Constitution of India, which provides that no citizen shall be discriminated against on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, in access to educational institutions maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds.

Secondly, in Jagwant Kaur v. State of Maharashtra (1952), the construction of a colony solely for Harijans was found to be violative of Article 15(1). To help the socially and educationally disadvantaged citizens without violating the provisions of Article 15, Clause(4) was added to the article.

Additionally, Article 29(2) is mentioned in Article 15(4), and it prohibits discrimination against any citizen on grounds of religion, race, caste, language, or any of them concerning admission to any educational institution maintained by the state or receiving aid out of state funds. 

Thus, Article 15(4) is not an exception to the principle of non-discrimination but rather a special provision to promote the advancement of socially and educationally backward sections of society.

A. Periakaruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu 

In A. Periakaruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu (1971), the Supreme Court held that classifying socially and educationally backward classes based on caste was in violation of Article 15(4), and that reservations were necessary for improving the conditions of such classes. 

Balaji v. State of Mysore

In Balaji v. State of Mysore (1963), the Court held that categorizing backwards and more backward classes was not justified under Article 15(4), and that reservations could not exceed 50%. 

State of AP v. USV Balaram

The Court also held in State of AP v. USV Balaram (1972) that caste should not be the determining factor for belonging to a backward class and that the list of backward classes would automatically be updated if they no longer require special aid from the state. 

State of UP v. Pradeep Tandon

In State of UP v. Pradeep Tandon (1974), the Court held that providing reserved seats to students from rural areas was unconstitutional, as poverty in rural areas does not equate to backwardness, and reservations could only be provided to socially and educationally backward classes.

Article 15(5) of the Constitution

Article 15(5) is a clause under the Indian Constitution that permits the government to make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with regard to their admission to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, aided or unaided by the State. This clause was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951.

The clause specifies that nothing in Article 15 or sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of Article 19 shall prevent the State from making such special provisions by law. Article 19(1)(g) grants citizens the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business. However, it is subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the State in the interest of the general public.

The clause also makes an exception for minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of Article 30. Article 30(1) guarantees the right of minorities, whether based on religion or language, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

In essence, Article 15(5) allows the State to provide affirmative action or reservations for socially and educationally backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in educational institutions. 

This provision was introduced to ensure that these marginalized sections of society have access to education and to promote equality of opportunity. However, it does not apply to minority educational institutions that have the constitutional right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

Article 15(6) of the Constitution

Article 15(6) allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of economically weaker sections of citizens, other than the socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes, which are already covered under clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15 of the Constitution of India.

Clause (a) of Article 15(6) allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of EWS of citizens other than those covered under clauses (4) and (5). This means that the state can make provisions for the economic betterment of any citizen who falls below a certain income level, regardless of their caste or community.

Clause (b) of Article 15(6) allows the state to make special provisions for the admission of economically weaker sections of citizens, other than those covered under clauses (4) and (5), to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the state. However, such provisions for admission would be in addition to existing reservations and subject to a maximum of ten per cent. of the total seats in each category.

Janhit Abhiyan v Union of India

On 16th January 2023, in a 3-2 majority, the Supreme Court upheld the 103rd Constitutional Amendment providing EWS reservation. With this, the Court extended the net of reservation benefits to include solely economic backwardness.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. The interpretation of this article by the judiciary has evolved over the years and expanded its scope to include indirect discrimination and positive discrimination in favour of historically disadvantaged groups. 

The Supreme Court has also clarified that economic backwardness can be a basis for affirmative action under Article 15(6) but not under Article 15(4) and (5) which are specifically limited to socially and educationally backward classes and Scheduled Castes and Tribes.