Q1. With reference to reservation in India and relevant constitutional provisions, consider the following statements:

1. In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), the Supreme Court generally prescribed a 50% ceiling on reservations, subject to exceptional circumstances.
2. Article 16(4B) permits backlog vacancies to be considered separately from the current year's vacancies while applying the ceiling on reservations.
3. Article 15(5) enables special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in educational institutions, including certain private institutions, but excluding minority educational institutions under Article 30(1).
4. Article 16(4) makes reservation in public employment an unconditional fundamental right of every backward class, irrespective of its representation in State services.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only 

(b) 1, 2 and 4 only 

(c) 1, 2 and 3 only 

(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer: (c) 

Explanation:

• Statement 1 is correct: In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), the Supreme Court generally limited reservations to 50%, while recognising that exceptional circumstances could justify a departure.
• Statement 2 is correct: Article 16(4B) allows unfilled reserved vacancies carried forward as backlog vacancies to be treated separately from vacancies of the current year for calculating the 50% ceiling.
• Statement 3 is correct: Article 15(5) permits special provisions for admissions to educational institutions, including certain private unaided institutions, but excludes minority educational institutions covered by Article 30(1).
• Statement 4 is incorrect: Article 16(4) is an enabling provision. It permits reservation for backward classes that, in the State's opinion, are inadequately represented in State services; it does not create an unconditional right to reservation.