Equality and Social Justice

7/28/2019 Equality and Social Justice

1/28

Equality and Social

Justice

Articles-14-18


2/28

Equality and Social Justice

Equality before law and Equal Protectionof Laws

Classification of Differential Treatments :Constitutional Validity

Gender Justice

Justice to Weaker Sections of Society


3/28

Article 14

The State shall not deny to any

person equality before the law orthe equal protection of laws

within the territory of India


4/28

Concept of Equality

Equality before Law

Equal Protection of Laws


5/28

Equality before Law

Does not mean absolute Equality Like should be treated alike


6/28

Dr. Jennings on Equality

Equality before the law means thatamong equals the law should be equaland should be equally administered, that

like should be treated alike. The right tosue and be sued , to prosecute and beprosecuted for the same kind of actionshould be same for all citizens of full age

and understanding without distinctions ofrace, religion, wealth , social status orpolitical influence.


7/28

Rule of Law

Absence of Arbitrary Power:Absolutesupremacy of law. Punishment only forbreach of law and nothing else.

Equality Before Law :All classes subjectto same ordinary law administered byordinary courts.

Constitution is the result of ordinarylaw of the land:


8/28

Equal Protection of Laws

All persons under similar circumstancesshall be treated alike


9/28

Exclusion of Article 14

Under International Law, foreignsovereign and ambassadors enjoy fullimmunity from any judicial process.

Immunity also available to enemy claimsfor acts of war.

Article 36 lays down that the President

and the governors are exempted from anycriminal proceeding during the tenure oftheir office.


10/28

Art. 359 (1) lays down that where aproclamation of emergency is in operationthe President may, by order, declare that

the right to move any court for theenforcement of such rights conferred byPart III (except Arts.20 and 21) shall

remain suspended.


11/28

New Concept of Equality

E.P. Royappa V. State of Tamil Nadu (AIR1974 SC 555)

Justice Krishna Iyer:

New Concept of Equality: Protectionagainst arbitrariness


12/28

Justice Krishna Iyer on Equality

Equality is a dynamic concept with manyaspects and dimensions and it cannot be cribbed, cabined and confined within traditionaland doctrinal limits. From a positivist point of

view, equality is antithetic to arbitrariness. Infact equality and arbitrariness are swornenemies; one belong to the rule of law in arepublic while the other to the whim and capriceof an absolute monarch. Where an act is

arbitrary, it is implicit in it that it is unequal bothaccording to political logic and constitutional lawand therefore violative of Article 14.


13/28

Case Laws

K.A.Abbas V. Union of India (AIR 1971 SC481)

E.P. Royappa V. State of Tamil Nadu (AIR1974 SC 555)

Ajay Hasia V. Khalid Mujib (AIR 191 SC487)

Air India V. Nargesh Mirza (AIR 1981 SCC663) (to be referred for Gender Justice)


14/28

Case Law

Indian Council of Legal Aid & Advice V.Bar Council of India (1995) 1 SCC 732

BALCO Employees Union (Regd ) V. UOIAIR 2002 SC 350


15/28

Cl ifi ti f Diff ti l


16/28

Classification of Differential

Treatments : Constitutional Validity

Cases wherein classification made-Constitutional validitychallenged

R.K. Ghosh V. J.G. Rajput (1996) 6 SCC744

Sunil Jaitley v State of Haryana (1984) 4SCC 296

Mithu V. State of Punjab AIR 1983 SC 473

K.A.Abbas V. UOI AIR 1971 AC 481


17/28

R.K. Ghosh V. J.G. Rajput

Facts: Respondent , and employee ofAhmedabad Municipal Corporation-challenged his suspension

Mr. B.L.Shethna- argued his case-obtainedstay

Mr. B.L.Shethna- appointed judge of High

Court of Gujarat. 1993, Respondent served with another

charge sheet


18/28

Charge sheet not connected with earlierdispute

Petition filed.

Contention: Said CS be stayed.

Appellant Municipal Corporation be

punished for Contempt of Court Two earlier orders be restored.


19/28

Petitionwas to be heard by- R.A. Mehta& B.L. Shethna

Appellant (AMC)- objected.

Contention- Justice Shethnaearlier hadappeared as an advocate of Respondent in1988.

Despite this HC- passed an order SC- Held: Action of Judge- violates Rule of

Law- Quashed order of HC


20/28

Validity of S. 303 of IPC:

Challenged

S. 303: states that if a person under asentence of life imprisonment in jailcommit murder he must be awarded

sentence of death.

S.302: states, if a person commits murderhe may be awarded either sentence of

death or sentence of life imprisonment.


21/28

Mithu V. State of Punjab

Facts: Different treatment persons whocommit murders whilst in under sentence(Case 1)and by persons while they are

not under sentence.( Case 2)

Distinction made for awarding deathsentence

Sentence of Deathmandatory in case 1

Discretionary- in Case 2


22/28


Challenged

Contention : which sentence be granted :Discretion of the Courts.

Judicial Discretion Available under S.302

But unavailable to a life convict u/S 303


23/28


Challenged

SC: Struck down S. 303 asunconstitutional

Ground: Classification between personsnot based on rational principal.


24/28

Validity of Cinematograph Act,

1952 Challenged

K.A. Abbas V. UOI

Fact: Cinematograph Act, 1952 Challenged

Films classified into categories U: Unrestricted Exhibition

A: Exhibition only for Adults


25/28

Grounds of Challenge

Motion picture-form of expression

Therefore , entitled to equal treatmentwith other forms of expression

Other formsnot subjected to priorrestraint

Therefore, different treatment to films-amounts to invalid classification


26/28

SC on Validity of Cinematograph

Act

Upheld

Different treatment necessary

Reasons: Motion picture- raises instantemotions

Stirs up emotions more deeply than otherproduct of art


27/28

Sunil Jaitley V.State of Haryana

Facts : 25 seats reserved for admission toMBBS and BDS students coming from ruralareas

Those who studied from 1-8 in rural areas


28/28

SC

Held: violative of Art.14 Reasons: Arbitrary and irrational

No rational to the object achieved Same Government Same Education course prescribed, equipment

and grants- including qualification of staffimparting education

Hence , similarly placed. Hence, Classification- Unconstitutional.

Documents

Equality and Social Justice