Site navigation

In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court has held that there

In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) the Supreme Court held that Article 16(4) does not permit reservation in promotions, while allowing existing promotion reservations…

Choose your answer

In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court has held that there

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer B

In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) the Supreme Court held that Article 16(4) does not permit reservation in promotions, while allowing existing promotion reservations to continue for five years. On that holding there "cannot be reservation in promotions", whether for Other Backward Classes, women or others. The 77th Amendment (1995) later inserted Article 16(4A) to enable promotion reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic