Article 15 of Indian Constitution, Clauses, Case Laws, Provisions

Article 15 of Indian Constitution

Article 15 of Indian Constitution is a Fundamental Right under Part III and forms part of the Right to Equality under Articles 14 to 18.

• It prohibits discrimination against citizens on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex and place of birth, while allowing the State to make special provisions for disadvantaged groups.
• It applies only to citizens, unlike Article 14, which guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws to every person.
• It promotes substantive equality by permitting affirmative measures for groups that face social, educational or economic disadvantage.

Article 15 of Indian Constitution Provisions

Article 15 contains six clauses that prohibit discrimination on specified grounds and enable the State to make special provisions for disadvantaged sections.

Article 15 (1)

Article 15(1) prohibits the State from discriminating against any citizen only on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

• It applies to discrimination by the State.
• It protects citizens from discrimination based on the five grounds mentioned in the Constitution.
• The words “only on the grounds” mean that discrimination must be based solely on one or more of these grounds.
• It applies only to citizens, unlike Article 14, which applies to every person.

Article 15 (2)

Article 15(2) prohibits discrimination against any citizen only on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them in access to certain public places and facilities.

• Article 15(2)(a) covers access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment.
• Article 15(2)(b) covers 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.
  • It protects citizens from being subjected to any disability, liability, restriction or condition on the specified grounds.
  • Article 15(2) has limited horizontal application because it can apply to private individuals and establishments, unlike the general rule of Article 15(1), which operates against the State.
  • This horizontal application is limited to the specific public spaces and grounds of discrimination mentioned in Article 15(2).

Article 15 (3)

Article 15(3) allows the State to make special provisions for women and children.

• It enables the State to adopt protective and supportive measures for women and children.
• It is based on the principle of substantive equality, which recognises that equal treatment may require special measures for disadvantaged groups.
• Such provisions may include measures relating to education, welfare, maternity benefits and child protection.
• Article 15(3) is an enabling provision and does not make special provisions for women and children mandatory.
• It does not itself provide for reservation of seats for women in local bodies, which is specifically provided under Articles 243D and 243T.

Originally, Article 15 contained only three clauses-Article 15(1), Article 15(2) and Article 15(3). Articles 15(4), 15(5) and 15(6) were inserted later through constitutional amendments to expand the scope of affirmative action and special provisions.

‹ ›

Article 15 of Indian Constitution Constitutional Amendments 

The Constitution was amended to broaden Article 15 and provide a constitutional basis for affirmative action for different disadvantaged groups.

Article 15 (4)

Article 15(4) allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).

• It was inserted by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951.
• The amendment was introduced following the State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951) judgment.

Article 15 (5)

Article 15(5) allows the State to make special provisions for the admission of socially and educationally backward classes, SCs and STs to educational institutions, including private institutions.

• It was inserted by the 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005.
• It covers private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State.
• Minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) are excluded from its scope.
• It was introduced to provide a constitutional basis for affirmative action in educational admissions, including in private institutions.
• It operates notwithstanding Article 19(1)(g), which protects the freedom to practise any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business.
• The provision deals specifically with educational admissions, while reservation in public employment is primarily dealt with under Article 16.

Article 15 (6)

Article 15(6) allows the State to make special provisions for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), including reservation in educational institutions.

• It was inserted by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019.
• It covers admission to educational institutions, including private aided and unaided institutions.
• Minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) are excluded.
• It permits reservation of up to 10% of seats for EWS, in addition to existing reservations.
• It expanded the framework of affirmative action to include economic disadvantage as a basis for special provisions.

Article 15 of Indian Constitution Judgements

Article 15 has been interpreted through several landmark Supreme Court judgments dealing with discrimination, affirmative action, reservation, gender equality and substantive equality.

• State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951): The Supreme Court struck down the Communal Government Order of Madras, which allocated seats in educational institutions among different communities. The Court held that the order violated Article 15(1) and Article 29(2). The judgment led to the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951, which inserted Article 15(4) and provided a constitutional basis for special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes, SCs and STs.
• M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore (1963): The Supreme Court examined the scope of Article 15(4) and held that backwardness must be social as well as educational. It observed that caste alone cannot be the sole basis for determining backwardness. The Court also held that reservation should be within reasonable limits, ordinarily not exceeding 50%.
• P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra (2005): The Supreme Court held that the State could not impose its reservation policy on unaided private professional educational institutions under the constitutional framework then existing. The judgment was an important background to the 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2005, which inserted Article 15(5) and enabled the State to make special provisions for admission in private educational institutions, except minority institutions.
• Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008): The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Article 15(5)and the 27% OBC reservation in Central Educational Institutions. It also supported the exclusion of the creamy layer from OBC reservation and confirmed that minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) are outside the scope of Article 15(5).
• NALSA v. Union of India (2014): The Supreme Court recognised transgender persons as a third gender and affirmed their right to equality and dignity. The Court held that discrimination based on gender identity is inconsistent with Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21.
• Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): The Supreme Court decriminalised consensual same-sex relations between adults by reading down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The Court recognised that discrimination based on sexual orientation is contrary to constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity and liberty, giving an expansive interpretation to the constitutional protection against discrimination.
• Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022): The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019, which introduced Article 15(6) and Article 16(6) for EWS reservation. By a 3:2 majority, the Court upheld the provision allowing up to 10% reservation for EWS, including in educational institutions under Article 15(6). The judgment confirmed that economic disadvantage can be a basis for affirmative action.
• State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024): The Supreme Court, by a 6:1 majority, held that States can sub-classify Scheduled Castes for reservation to ensure that the benefits reach the more disadvantaged groups within the SC category. The Court overruled E.V. Chinnaiah (2004) on this point. The judgment is primarily based on Articles 14, 16 and 341, but is relevant to the broader constitutional framework of affirmative action.

Article 15 of Indian Constitution Committees

Several committees have shaped India’s approach to affirmative action by examining the social and educational backwardness of different groups and recommending measures for their advancement.

Kalelkar Commission (1953): The First Backward Classes Commission, headed by Kaka Kalelkar, was constituted under Article 340 to identify socially and educationally backward classes and suggest measures for their advancement.

• It recommended reservation in government services and educational institutions for backward classes, along with measures such as land reforms, adult education and economic development programmes

Mandal Commission (1979): The Second Backward Classes Commission, headed by B.P. Mandal was constituted under Article 340 to identify socially and educationally backward classes.

• It recommended 27% reservation for OBCs in government services and educational institutions, along with other measures for their advancement.
• The recommendation for 27% reservation in Central Government jobs was implemented in 1990. Its implementation was later examined by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992).

Sachar Committee (2005): Headed by Justice Rajinder Sachar, it examined the social, economic and educational status of Muslims in India.

• It recommended measures to improve education, skill development, access to credit, basic amenities and affirmative action, including proposals for an Equal Opportunity Commission and National Data Bank.

Rohini Commission (2017): Headed by Justice G. Rohini, it was constituted to examine the sub-categorisation of OBCs and ensure a more equitable distribution of reservation benefits.

• It examined a mechanism for sub-categorising OBCs and correcting repetitions, ambiguities and inconsistencies in the Central OBC List. 
• The Commission submitted its report to the President on 31 July 2023, but its recommendations have not been implemented by the Central Government so far. 

Article 15 of Indian Constitution Significance

Article 15 combines equality with affirmative action to promote substantive equality and social justice.

• Promotes equality: Protects citizens against discrimination on specified grounds.
• Supports substantive equality: Allows special measures for disadvantaged groups.
• Enables affirmative action: Provides for special provisions for women, children, backward classes, SCs, STs and EWS.
• Strengthens social justice: Helps address historical and social disadvantages.
• Protects public access: Prevents discrimination in access to specified public places and facilities.
• Promotes educational inclusion: Enables special provisions for disadvantaged groups in education.
• Advances gender justice: Allows special measures for women and children.
• Balances equality and equity: Combines equal treatment with measures needed to achieve meaningful equality.