Supreme Court questions quota to children of economically, educationally advanced families in backward classes

Statement 1 is incorrect: The Supreme Court ruled that Aadhaar metadata cannot be stored for more than six months, which invalidated the provision in the Aadhaar Act that allowed the storage of such data for up to five years. Statement 2 is correct: The Supreme Court struck down Section 57 which allowed private corporations to verify Aadhaar data. The Court held this provision unconstitutional, as it was seen to violate privacy rights. Statement 3 is incorrect: The 2018 Supreme Court judgment declared that making Aadhaar mandatory for services beyond welfare schemes, including financial services like insurance or for preventing money laundering, was unconstitutional. In response to this ruling, the IRDAI issued an advisory in 2019, clarifying that Aadhaar is not mandatory for obtaining insurance. It also withdrew its earlier 2017 policy that had made Aadhaar compulsory for insurance in the context of anti-money laundering measures. Statement 4 is correct: In the Aadhaar verdict, the Supreme Court upheld Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act, which allows the Central or State Governments to make Aadhaar authentication mandatory for receiving subsidies, benefits, or services funded by the Consolidated Fund of India. The Court defined welfare schemes as those funded by the Consolidated Fund of India, thus validating the use of Aadhaar for such schemes. Therefore, the correct answer is B. 2 and 4 only.

* The First Amendment Act, of 1951, added the fourth clause to Article 15 that empowered the government to make any law for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled * Tribes. The added clause elucidates that in case such special provisions are introduced, they cannot be said to be breaching Article 15 and Article 29(2) of the Constitution. * The need to insert this clause was felt after the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam (1951). According to the facts of this case, the Madras government issued an Order that provided reservation on the grounds of religion, race, and caste. This Order was contended to be in breach of Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution. The Court also gave a literal interpretation to the constitutional provisions and held that reserving seats in public institutions for backward classes violates Articles 15(1) and 29(2). Therefore, to nullify the effect of similar judicial pronouncements, Article 15 was amended. * Similarly, Article 19(1)(a) grants the right to free speech and expression to Indian citizens. This right is considered an essential feature of democracy. However, Article 19(2) specifies the restrictions that can curtail this freedom. The First Amendment to the Indian Constitution altered these restrictions by widening their ambit. The second change, via the Amendment Act of 1951, was made to Clause 6 of Article 19. Note: UPSC deleted this question when the final answer key was issued.

The Ninth Schedule was introduced by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 to protect certain laws, particularly those related to land reforms, from judicial review. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru introduced the Constitution (First Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha in 1951. This amendment aimed to safeguard progressive socio-economic legislation from being struck down by courts on the grounds of violating fundamental rights, particularly the right to property under Article 31 (which was later repealed by the 44th Amendment in 1978).

The Fifth Schedule of the Indian Constitution deals with the administration and governance of Scheduled Areas, which are regions with a significant tribal population. It aims to safeguard the rights, culture, and land of tribal communities while preventing their exploitation. Under this Schedule, the Governor of a state with Scheduled Areas has special powers, including the authority to: - Declare any law related to the transfer of tribal land as null and void if it is found to violate the interests of the tribal population. - Prohibit or regulate the transfer of tribal land to non-tribals, ensuring that tribal communities retain control over their ancestral land and resources. These provisions act as a protective mechanism, preventing tribal communities from being forced or manipulated into selling their land for activities like mining, industries, or large-scale projects without adequate safeguards.

Statement 1 is not correct: The Government had launched a scheme viz Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Government of India, 1993. As per the scheme, Temporary status would be conferred on all casual labourers who were in employment and who have rendered a continuous service of at least one year, which means that they must have been engaged for at least 240 days (206 days in case of offices observing 5 days week). Statement 2 is correct: The Supreme Court has decreed that casual workers are also entitled to social security benefits as stipulated in the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. The Court's ruling stemmed from its interpretation of Section 2(f) of the EPF Act, wherein the definition of an "employee" encompasses a broad scope, including any individual engaged directly or indirectly in connection with an establishment's work and receiving wages. A bench of the Supreme Court affirmed this viewpoint. Statement 3 is correct: The government has the authority to specify through a notification that an establishment or industry is obligated to disburse wages exclusively via its bank account.

Statement 1 is incorrect: As per the RTE Act, the minimum qualification for teachers is set by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), not the state council. Statement 2 is correct: The RTE Act mandates that candidates must pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) to qualify for teaching primary classes. The NCTE sets the guidelines for conducting this test. Statement 3 is incorrect: According to the All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2019-20, approximately 67% of teacher education institutions in India are privately managed, while only around 33% are government-run. Hence, the correct answer is option (b) 2 only.

Statement 1 is incorrect. The “Right to the City” is not a formally agreed universal human right in international law. It is a normative and political concept. UN-Habitat uses the idea in the New Urban Agenda, but: it does not legally monitor binding national commitments. Statement 2 is correct. The Right to the City is the right of all inhabitants (present and future, permanent and temporary) to inhabit, use, occupy, produce, transform, govern, and enjoy cities, towns, and human settlements that are just, inclusive, safe, sustainable and democratic, defined as common goods for enjoying life with dignity and peace. The right to the city further implies responsibilities on governments and people to claim, defend, and promote this right. Statement 3 is correct. “Right to the City” is interpreted as an inclusive urban citizenship right. The concept says that all city dwellers, including: migrants, slum dwellers, residents of unauthorized colonies, have a claim to urban services and dignity. It views residents not as “encroachers” but as rights-bearing urban citizens who contribute to the city economy. Hence: denial of water, sanitation, waste management, etc. merely because a settlement is “unauthorized” is seen as violating the spirit of Right to the City. Indian courts have also held that basic services cannot be denied even to illegal settlements, as they are part of Article 21 – Right to Life. Note: UPSC usually takes welfare centric approach in questions.

Statement 1 is incorrect: The term "basic structure" is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, there are certain features of the Constitution that form its basic structure and cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by Parliament. Although the basic structure doctrine includes elements such as federalism, secularism, democracy, and fundamental rights, these features are not explicitly listed as the 'basic structure' in the Constitution itself. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention the power of judicial review. Instead, this power is derived from various provisions, particularly Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions, ensuring they do not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. This power is essential in maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting citizens' rights. Hence, neither of the statements is correct.

Statement 1 is incorrect. High Courts have the power to declare central laws unconstitutional. This power is derived from their inherent jurisdiction to uphold the Constitution. Statement 2 is incorrect. While the Supreme Court cannot question the amending power of the Parliament, it can review the constitutional validity of an amendment. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the doctrine of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. Any amendment that violates this basic structure can be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Statement 1 is correct: The Ninth Schedule was introduced through the First Constitutional Amendment (1951) to protect certain laws from judicial review, even if they violated Fundamental Rights (Part III of the Constitution). Statement 2 is incorrect: The protection under the Ninth Schedule is not absolute. As per the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) and reaffirmed in the I.R. Coelho case (2007), laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, can still be challenged if they violate the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution. Thus, while the Ninth Schedule provides a degree of protection, the Supreme Court retains the power to review laws that undermine the Constitution’s core principles. Hence, the correct answer is option (a) 1 only.