Affirmative action

Also called: Positive discrimination · Topic: Equality and Social Justice · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 3 "Equality"; Class 11, Ch 4 "Social Justice"; Class 11, Ch 10 "The Philosophy of the Constitution"

Meaning

Affirmative action (also called positive discrimination) means policies that give special help or chances to groups that faced discrimination in the past. The help can come in education, jobs or representation, so that these groups get real equality and not only equality on paper. It matters because centuries of exclusion cannot be undone just by treating everyone the same. In India it takes the form of reservation (a fixed share of seats or posts kept for a group), which the Constitution has provided since the start of the Republic.

Explanation

Why it is needed: formal vs substantive equality

• Formal equality: the law treats everyone the same. On its own, it cannot remove inequality that is centuries deep.
• Substantive (real) equality: people actually get equal chances. This sometimes needs positive measures, where the state gives extra help to groups that were held back.
• Goal of affirmative action: to correct the cumulative effect of past discrimination, meaning harm that built up over many generations.
• The basic logic:
• A group kept out of schools for generations cannot compete equally within one generation.
• So the state treats people differently because their situations are different. This is a principle of social justice.

Its forms, from mild to strong

Form	What it means	Example
Preferential spending	Extra money and facilities for a group	Scholarships and hostels for SC/ST students
Special consideration	The group's background counts as a plus point in selection	US "plus factor" in college admissions
Quotas (reservation)	A fixed share of seats or posts kept for the group	15% SC, 7.5% ST, 27% OBC in central government jobs

• India chose the strongest form, quotas. They apply in education, government jobs and legislatures.

The debate: for and against

Arguments for

• SCs, STs and other groups faced prejudice, exclusion and segregation for centuries.
• Different starting points need different help:
• A first-generation learner (the first person in the family to go to school or college) gets no help with studies at home.
• Children of educated families start with books, guidance and contacts.

• Coaching costs and high fees keep poor students out of medicine, engineering and management courses.

• Reservation gives a group recognition of its special needs.

Arguments against

• Reverse discrimination: a policy meant to help one group ends up treating others unfairly. Critics say quotas arbitrarily deny equal treatment to people outside the reserved groups.
• Sorting people by caste or colour keeps these identities alive. Critics say this reinforces the very prejudices that equality is meant to remove.
• Merit and efficiency: critics say selection should depend on ability alone. They point to Art. 335's "efficiency of administration" clause.
• Reservation proposals have often caused anger and protests, for example the agitation after the Mandal Commission recommendations were implemented in 1990.

NCERT's key distinction

• Equality as a guiding principle of state policy: the state may treat groups differently to reach equality.
• Equality as an individual's right: each person has a right to equal treatment.
• The reservation debate is a clash between these two ideas.

Limits built into the system

• 50% ceiling on total reservation (Indra Sawhney, 1992), except in extraordinary situations. EWS seats are now allowed above it.
• Creamy layer (the better-off members of the OBCs, who are no longer backward) is excluded from OBC reservation.
• Efficiency of administration (Art. 335) has to be weighed against SC/ST claims to posts.
• Time limit only on political reservation: Art. 334 sets an end date for reserved legislative seats. Reservation in jobs and education has no end date.

In the Constitution and practice

Constitutional base

• Art. 15(4), added by the 1st Amendment, 1951: special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes, SCs and STs.
• Art. 16(4): reservation in government posts for backward classes that are not adequately represented.
• Art. 330 / Art. 332: seats reserved for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and the state Legislative Assemblies.
• Art. 335: SC/ST claims to posts are weighed against the "maintenance of efficiency of administration". A proviso added by the 82nd Amendment, 2000 allows relaxed qualifying marks in promotions.
• Art. 334: the time limit on reserved legislative seats. The original period was ten years (to 1960), and Parliament has extended it every ten years since.

The 104th Amendment, 2019

• Steps: it was introduced as the Constitution (126th Amendment) Bill, 2019. Parliament passed it, and it came into force on 25 January 2020 [2].
• Change: Art. 334 now reads "eighty years" for SC/ST seats and "seventy years" for Anglo-Indian nomination [2].
• Result 1: SC/ST seat reservation continues up to 25 January 2030 [2].
• Result 2: the nomination of Anglo-Indians to the Lok Sabha (old Art. 331) and to state Assemblies (old Art. 333) lapsed on 25 January 2020 [2].
• Reason given: SCs and STs "have made considerable progress", but the reasons for reserving seats "have not yet ceased to exist" [2].

Landmark cases and amendments

• Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992): the Mandal case, decided by nine judges.
• It upheld 27% OBC reservation in central government jobs.
• It excluded the creamy layer.
• It set a 50% ceiling.

• It held that there can be no reservation on economic grounds alone.

• 93rd Amendment, 2005: inserted Art. 15(5).

• It allows reservation in educational institutions, including private unaided ones.
• Minority institutions under Art. 30(1) are exempt.

• It was upheld in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust (2014).

• 103rd Amendment, 2019: inserted Arts. 15(6) and 16(6).

• These allow up to 10% EWS (Economically Weaker Sections) reservation for citizens not covered by SC/ST/OBC quotas.
• The amendment was upheld 3:2 in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022).

• Effect: economic criteria alone became a valid basis for reservation, and EWS seats sit above the 50% ceiling.

• State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024): seven judges ruled 6:1 on 1 August 2024.

• States may sub-classify SCs and STs, meaning they can split the quota so the most backward castes within the list get a fair share.
• It overruled E.V. Chinnaiah (2004), which had treated SCs as one uniform group.
• Some judges suggested a creamy layer for SCs and STs too. This was not a binding direction.

Recent developments

• Caste enumeration in Census 2027:
• The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs took the decision on 30 April 2025 [3].
• The Centre notified the Census under Section 3 of the Census Act, 1948 on 16 June 2025 [3].
• Castes will be counted in Phase II (Population Enumeration), February 2027 [3][4].
• The reference date is 1 March 2027. For Ladakh and the snow-bound areas of J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, it is 1 October 2026 [3].

• This is the first count of all castes since Independence. Earlier Censuses counted only SCs and STs [4].

• Private jobs: there are continuing demands to extend quotas to private-sector jobs. No constitutional provision covers this yet.

The US comparison

• Executive Order 10925 (1961, President Kennedy) first used the phrase "affirmative action".
• Bakke (1978): fixed racial quotas are unconstitutional, but race can be one factor in admissions.
• SFFA v. Harvard / UNC (2023): race-conscious admissions ended.
• EO 11246 was revoked in January 2025, removing affirmative-action duties for federal contractors.
• Contrast: India's quotas are written into the Constitution. US measures came from executive orders, laws and court decisions, and they are now shrinking.

Don't confuse with

• Formal equality: the same rules apply to everyone. Affirmative action is a tool of substantive equality, which treats people differently so that they end up with real equal chances.
• Reverse discrimination: this is the critics' name for the unfair treatment of people outside the reserved groups. It is an argument against affirmative action, not another word for it.
• Reservation (quota): this is only the strongest form of affirmative action. Scholarships, hostels and "plus factors" are also affirmative action, but they are not quotas.
• Art. 334 time limit vs reservation in jobs and education: only legislative seats have an end date (now 2030). Reservation in jobs and education under Arts. 15 and 16 has none.

Prelims Hooks

• 104th Amendment, 2019 (introduced as the 126th Amendment Bill): extended SC/ST seats in the Lok Sabha and Assemblies to 25 January 2030 and let Anglo-Indian nomination lapse. It came into force on 25 January 2020 [2]. Watch for the numbering trap.
• Art. 15(5) (93rd Amendment, 2005) = reservation in private unaided educational institutions, except minority institutions under Art. 30(1). Upheld in Pramati (2014).
• Arts. 15(6) and 16(6) (103rd Amendment, 2019) = up to 10% EWS reservation. Upheld 3:2 in Janhit Abhiyan (2022).
• Indra Sawhney (1992) = 27% OBC quota upheld, creamy layer excluded, 50% ceiling, no reservation on economic grounds alone.
• Davinder Singh (2024) = 7 judges, 6:1: states may sub-classify SCs/STs. It overruled E.V. Chinnaiah (2004).
• USA: "affirmative action" was first used in EO 10925 (1961). Bakke (1978) = no quotas, but race can be a factor. SFFA (2023) = race-conscious admissions ended.

Mains Points

• Formal vs substantive equality: reservation is a tool of substantive equality. Critics call it reverse discrimination.
• A balanced answer says quotas fix representation but not early capacity gaps.

• So quotas should be paired with good schools, nutrition, scholarships and coaching from an early age.

• Shift from caste to "class plus caste": EWS (2019, upheld in Janhit Abhiyan 2022) and sub-classification (Davinder Singh 2024) show a move towards targeting the most deprived within groups.

• This creates tension with the 50% ceiling.
• It also raises the question of a creamy layer for SCs/STs.

• Caste data from Census 2027 can make this targeting evidence-based.

• Temporary in theory, permanent in practice: Art. 334 has been extended seven times, now to 2030. A reform option is clear exit criteria (measurable representation targets) instead of automatic ten-year renewals. The US–India contrast helps here: India's constitutional quotas are harder to roll back but more rigid. A mix of quotas and outreach, including in private institutions and jobs, is one way forward.

Related concepts

• Reverse discrimination

Read more

• Affirmative action and the reservation debate