Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India

A curious case of judicial indiscipline

  1. Indira Sawhney v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 477 []
  2. Id. []
  3. A. K. Thakur v. UOI, 2008(56) BLJR1292 []
  4. Id. []
  5. For the definition of Central Educational Institution, see Section 2(d), CEI Act (2006). []
  6. As per Article 46, it is the mandate of the state to promote the educational and economic interests of scheduled castes, scheduled  tribes  and  other weaker sections of society. []
  7. Statement of Objects and Reasons, CEI Act (2006). []
  8. The basic structure doctrine, propounded by the Supreme Court in Kesavananda v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225, places substantive and procedural limits on the amending process provided in the Constitution []
  9. Supra note 3, at ¶¶ 28, 30 (Balakrishnan CJ). []
  10. There were other grounds of challenge as well to the validity of Article 15(5). For example, whether the exclusion of minority educational institutions from Article 15(5) violated Article 14 of Constitution? This paper has, however, concentrated only on Article 15(5). []
  11. Supra note 3, note 1 at ¶ 95 (Balakrishnan CJ). []
  12. Supra note 3 []
  13. Supra note 1 []
  14. Id. []
  15. 44.43 K. Balagopal, Ideology and Adjudication: The Supreme Court and OBC Reservations EPW 16-19 (2009). []
  16. Supra note 1 []
  17. Supra note 3 []
  18. Supra note 1 []
  19. Supra note 15 []
  20. Supra note 1 []
  21. Supra note 3 []
  22. Supra note 3 []
  23. T.M.A. Pai Foundation and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Ors, AIR 2003 SC 355 []

Share this post:

Related Posts