Day 7 : “From Constituent Assembly to Constitutional Morality: The Journey of Affirmative Actions in India” by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Former Chief Justice of India.

Event Date: 11th October 2025

Event brief description

The Masterclass Series at Galgotias University commenced on 23rd August 2025 with its inaugural lecture titled “From Constituent Assembly to Constitutional Morality: The Journey of Affirmative Actions in India” by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Former Chief Justice of India. The event was graced by Prof. (Dr.) Aditya Tomer, Dean, School of Law, Galgotias University. In continuation with earlier lectures in this series, Justice U. U. Lalit in current lecture traced the evolution of affirmative action in India, from the Mandal Commission and Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) to the key constitutional amendments that followed. He explained how the 77th and 85th Amendments restored reservations in promotions for SCs and STs and introduced consequential seniority, while the 103rd Amendment extended reservations to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). Citing cases like Virpal Singh Chauhan and Ajit Singh, he illustrated how the “catch-up rule” evolved and was later overridden by Parliament. Using examples from education and employment, he emphasized balancing merit with inclusiveness. Concluding, Justice Lalit highlighted education’s role in bridging inequalities and reaffirmed the constitutional balance between judicial review and parliamentary sovereignty. 

Event Detailed Description

Justice U.U. Lalit began his address by tracing the historical evolution of affirmative action policies in India, emphasizing the Mandal Commission Report’s transformative role in shaping the reservation framework. He revisited the landmark Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) judgment, which upheld reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) while introducing the concept of the “creamy layer” to exclude the more advanced among them. Justice Lalit explained how this judgment became the cornerstone of India’s affirmative action jurisprudence, setting the stage for later constitutional amendments—the 77th, 85th, and 103rd—which redefined the scope and reach of reservations in public employment and education.

Elaborating on these developments, Justice Lalit explained that Indira Sawhney had disallowed reservations in promotions, but this position was reversed through the 77th Constitutional Amendment (1995), which inserted Article 16(4A) to allow reservation in promotions for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). This amendment effectively overturned portions of Justice Jeevan Reddy’s opinion that had restricted such provisions. Justice Lalit further noted that the 85th Amendment (2001) expanded this framework by introducing the principle of “consequential seniority,” thereby nullifying the “catch-up rule” that had emerged from earlier Supreme Court rulings such as Virpal Singh Chauhan, Ajit Singh, and R.K. Sabharwal. Together, these amendments reflected Parliament’s commitment to ensuring substantive equality for historically marginalized groups.

Turning to the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, Justice Lalit discussed its introduction of reservations for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), marking a significant expansion of the affirmative action policy beyond caste-based categories. He clarified that while earlier judgments, including those influenced by Justice Jeevan Reddy, had curtailed such provisions, Parliament exercised its constitutional power to amend the law to address economic disadvantage as a distinct axis of inequality. Out of Justice Reddy’s five key recommendations in Indira Sawhney, three were accepted by Parliament, while the remaining two—relating to reservations in promotions—were consciously set aside through constitutional amendment, illustrating the evolving dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature in shaping social justice policies.

Justice Lalit supplemented his discussion with practical examples from police recruitment and medical college admissions to highlight how both intellectual and physical competencies must be balanced in assessing merit and ensuring inclusiveness. He warned against rigid compartmentalization of society, urging that affirmative action must foster, not fragment, social harmony. While advocating for a classless society, he asserted that merit should not be undermined but supported through mechanisms like academic assistance for students from reserved categories—a point illustrated through an example shared by a professor from IIT Delhi.

Concluding his address, Justice Lalit emphasized education as the most effective bridge to close societal gaps and promote equality. In response to questions about the powers of the Supreme Court and Parliament, he invoked Arun Jaitley’s observation that “the tyranny of the unelected must be avoided,” reaffirming the essential balance between judicial review and parliamentary sovereignty in preserving India’s democratic and constitutional equilibrium.

Department Name – School of Law

Related Goal