UPSC MainsGeneral Studies Paper IIConstitutionPractice question

Right to Equality in Indian Constitution

Examine the Right to Equality in the Indian Constitution.

Examine~250 words2 min readmedium
Attempt it first, timed · optional

Write the answer on paper, as in the exam. Start the timer, keep to the word target.

00:00/ 11 min · 250 words

Done writing? Photograph the sheet and see how it scores against this model answer, with feedback on what to fix.

Upload your answer sheet

How to approach

Introduce the Right to Equality by referencing Articles 14 to 18 and their role in realizing the Preamble's goals. Examine the substantive provisions—Article 14's non-arbitrariness, Articles 15 and 16's affirmative action, and Articles 17 and 18's eradication of social hierarchies—using landmark judicial precedents. Conclude with a forward-looking perspective on achieving substantive socio-economic equality.

Model answer

396 words

Introduction

The Right to Equality, enshrined in Articles 14 to 18 of the Indian Constitution, forms the cornerstone of India's constitutional democracy and social justice agenda. It operationalizes the Preamble's guarantee of equality of status and opportunity, transforming formal legal parity into an active instrument for substantive empowerment and social transformation.

1. Article 14: Equality Before Law and Rule of Law

Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. While it prohibits class legislation, it permits reasonable classification founded on an intelligible differentia with a rational nexus to the objective sought.

  • Principle of Non-Arbitrariness: In E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974), the Supreme Court introduced the 'new doctrine' of equality, establishing that equality is a dynamic concept antithetical to state arbitrariness and inherent to the rule of law.

2. Articles 15 and 16: Non-Discrimination and Substantive Affirmative Action

Articles 15 and 16 transcend formal equality by obligating the state to undertake positive measures for disadvantaged sections, ensuring equal opportunity in education and public employment.

  • Economic Criteria for Reservation: In Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022), the Supreme Court upheld the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, affirming that economic disadvantage constitutes a valid constitutional criterion for affirmative action.
  • Sub-Classification for Equal Outcomes: In State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024), a seven-judge Constitution Bench ruled that sub-classification within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is constitutionally permissible to prioritize the most marginalized sub-groups, reinforcing the doctrine of substantive equality.

3. Articles 17 and 18: Dismantling Social Hierarchies

These provisions address historical caste-based exclusion and feudal inequalities.

  • Abolition of Untouchability (Article 17): Untouchability is abolished in all forms and made a punishable offence, reinforced legislatively by the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
  • Abolition of Titles (Article 18): Prohibits state conferment of feudal or hereditary titles. In Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court clarified that National Awards (such as Bharat Ratna and Padma awards) do not violate Article 18, provided they are not used as hereditary titles or prefixes/suffixes.

Conclusion

To realize genuine socio-economic equality, constitutional jurisprudence must be supported by empirical, data-driven affirmative action and targeted interventions. Bridging structural gaps in education, healthcare, and digital access is vital to translating formal constitutional guarantees into enduring substantive equality.

Key facts to remember

case study
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974)

The Supreme Court expanded Article 14 beyond mere reasonable classification, ruling that equality is a dynamic concept that directly challenges state arbitrariness.

case study
State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024)

A 7-judge Constitution Bench held that states have the power to create sub-classifications within reserved categories (SC/ST) to ensure benefits reach the most disadvantaged sub-groups.

scheme
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

A dedicated penal statute enacted to enforce the constitutional mandate of Article 17 by preventing atrocities and discrimination against members of SC and ST communities.

Frequently asked questions

Do National Awards like Padma Shri violate Article 18 of the Constitution?

No. In Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court ruled that national civilian honours recognize merit and public service rather than hereditary nobility, hence they do not violate Article 18 so long as they are not used as prefixes or suffixes.