BBA L.L.B. (Hons.

) / Fifth Semester- 2022

CONSTITUTION ICA

Topic: ARTICLE 14

CASE STUDY: RAMANA DAYARAM SHETTY V. THE INTERNATIONAL

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS

Submitted To: Prof. Shrikant Aithal

Submitted by: Anoushka Sud (F003)

Sap Id: 81022019327

1|Page
INDEX

SERIAL NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER

l. INTRODUCTION 3
2. INGREDIENTS OF ARTICLE 14 4
3. THE DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE 6
EXPECTATION
4. THE EXCEPTION TO RIGHT TO 7
EQUALITY

5. CASE STUDY AND ANALYSIS 8

6. RIGHT TO EQUALITY IN INDIA vs 12
U.S.
7. CONCLUSION 14

2|Page
INTRODUCTION

"Equality is the soul of liberty; there is, in fact, no liberty without it."

- Frances Wright

Prior to independence, we endured severe discrimination based on our caste, colour, gender, and
so on. This sorrow was likewise experienced by the forefathers of our Constitution. To break this
taboo in our culture, the drafters of our Constitution included equality in our ultimate
constitutional text. This equality principle is written in Article 14 of the constitution and assures
that there is no discrimination among the people and that arbitrariness in governmental activity is
eliminated.1 It asserts that every Indian citizen is equal in the eyes of the law, and that
discrimination based on post, caste, religion, place of birth, or gender is completely banned. It is
also a first basic right that speaks about equality, which prohibits uneven treatment and calls for
legislation that provide equal treatment.

2
Article 14 of the Indian constitution is the cornerstone of our society's right to equality. It
declares that everyone is equal before the law and that there will be no discrimination. It also
includes the principle of equal opportunity and particular treatment for the underprivileged
members of society.

"The State must not deny to any individual equality before the law or equal protection of the
laws within the territory of India,"3 declares Article 14.

The essential premise of liberalism is to treat all people equally, and Article 14 assures that all
citizens receive the same treatment. Any person's liberty is intimately related to the equality he or
she receives in society.

1
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA P.No.48 (Eastern Book Company, 2017 Thirteenth Edition) AIR 1951 SC 318

2
Judicial Review Laxmikanth Summary https://youtu.be/gtc-iBmjkU0
3
 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA P.No.48 (Eastern Book Company, 2017 Thirteenth Edition)

3|Page
INGREDIENTS OF ARTICLE 14

There are mainly three Ingredients of Article 14 which are as follows –

A. EQUALITY BEFORE LAW

This idea originates from the founding document of the United Kingdom, the English
Constitution. In accordance with this philosophy, every individual, from the highest-
ranking official to the lowest-ranking peon, is seen as having the same value in the eyes
of the law. In other words, it states that every individual in our society should be treated
equally, and that every person in the society should receive the same punishment for the
same act. This is to ensure that everyone in our society is held to the same standards. It is
forbidden to discriminate against people on the basis of their money, caste, colour, race,
or any other factor. No one can get a privileged role from the state in any capacity. Legal
equality is another name for this concept. This is a bad term since it allows for a certain
individual in society to be stripped of any unique privilege or honour that may have been
bestowed upon them by society.

B. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW

This notion is borrowed from the United States of America's constitution (USA).
According to this idea, the state is required to give equal opportunity to its inhabitants.
According to the spirit of this idea, "equals should be treated equally." In other words,
this rule indicates that there is no comparison between equal and unequal, hence the state
should use a positive discrimination mechanism.

4
Assume there are two children in a house, one is five years old and the other is ten years
old, and we want to treat both of them equally in terms of schooling, health care, and so
on. It does not imply that their expenditures are the same because of their age group; the
older children's tuition fees and other expenses differ from one another. 5So, for better
treatment, it is necessary to differentiate and classify both children's needs. This is
4
AIR 1978 SC 597
5
AIR 1974 SC 555

4|Page
 essentially an equal protection of law which states that two persons who are not equal,
who are in an unequal situation, the laws which are applicable to unequal people laws
may also differ for both people on the basic unequal situation.

For preventing this classification from undue influence we have formulated a test in State
of Bombay v. F.N.Balsara6

For this we have two conditions first is “Intelligible Differentia” and second one is
“Rational Nexus”

 Intelligible differentia- if you are creating two groups, it is essential to assign

reason why you are differentiating two different groups, means there has been an
intelligent reason that why you are differentiating those two groups in different
group

 Rational nexus- it says whatever your purpose is for differentiating two groups
from each other and whatever result you want to achieve from differentiating
those two groups, there will be a nexus between them in other words there is a
rational relationship between classification and desired end.

C. RULE OF LAW
In our Constitution, the rule of law is enshrined under Article 14 of the constitution. The
term rule of law is derived from the French phrase ‘La Principe de Legalite’ which
means the governance of a state on the principle of equality and justice. The rule of law is
the fundamental principle of a democratic setup and it is totally against the policy of
arbitrariness. The concept states that democracy shall function as per the law and not by
the arbitrary actions of men.
This concept of “rule of law” is derived from Magna Carta and was given by Professor
Dicey. This concept has 3 elements namely –
 The supremacy of law– As per Professor Dicey, this concept of “Rule of Law”
stands for absolute supremacy of law. Every person ranging from a common man
6
AIR 1951 SC 318

5|Page
 to a government minister needs to abide by the holy Constitution. Further, no
person shall be prosecuted except in situations where the breach of law occurs and
this offence is proved in a court of law.
 Equality before law– As discussed earlier, this means that the law is equal for
everyone no one shall be accorded special treatment on account of his wealth,
caste, sex, race, etc. The law shall treat everyone equally.
 The dominance of Legal Spirit – The term legal spirit denotes the spirit of
justice. It states that the law shall always follow the principle of justice and no one
shall be deprived of his life and liberty except due process. The right of an
individual shall be given due importance.

In Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Shri Raj Narain, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that that “rule of
law” enshrined under Article 14 of the constitution is a part of the basic structure of the
constitution. It cannot be curtailed or destroyed even by an amendment to the constitution.

THE DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

This concept, as its name indicates, discusses the expectations that individuals have of the
politicians in their own countries. This idea placed a moral duty on the part of a state to enact
laws that transmit equality to all segments of society. 7It is not a right recognised by the law, but
it does provide individuals with the right to a judicial review of the actions taken by
administrative authorities in an effort to preserve their rights. Having said that, it is essential to
emphasise the requirement that the expectations of citizens be fair and sensible.

THE EXCEPTION TO RIGHT TO EQUALITY

7
2018 Del HC

6|Page
It is important to keep in mind that the right to equality is not one that is inherently absolute, and
that there are a number of exceptions that are granted for it. The honourable supreme court
decided, in the case State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, that the right to equality is not
unqualified and that it does, in fact, contain a number of significant qualifications and caveats.

In the case involving the Special Courts Bill, the constitutionality of such a special court was
challenged before the honourable supreme court on the grounds that it violated Article 14 of the
constitution. 8The court decided that there was reasonability and rationale behind the objective of
the formation of these courts, and as a result, it is not in violation of Article 14 of our
Constitution because of this decision.

Other Exceptions of Article 14

 9
Article 361 of our Constitution confers a special privilege that during the tenure of the
President and the Governor of the State of his office, there shall be no criminal
proceedings against them in any court of law.
 Foreign diplomats are also immune from the jurisdiction of our court
 The judges and the police officers also enjoy the protection for the act being done as per
their scope of authority and power. However, if any act exceeds their domain of power,
they can be held liable for the same. For example – In extrajudicial killing, the police
officer concerned may be held personally liable.
 Special groups like some Trade Union and other organizations also enjoy privileges or
immunity against proceedings in certain matters.
 Some certain classes of people also enjoy freedom against persecution. These include our
doctors and armed forces etc.

8
Article 14 of the Indian Constitution

9
Law Commission 145 Report

7|Page
CASE STUDY

Ramana Dayaram Shetty  V. The International Airport Authority AIR 1979 SC 1628

FACTS

The International Airport Authority called for tenders to put up a second-class restaurant and two
Snack bars at the International Airport Bombay.  The tender of the 4th respondent was accepted
by the authorities; however it was later found that he did not satisfy the condition of having at
least 5 years’ experience as a registered second class hotelier as mentioned in the tender
invitation.  Therefore, the Airport authorities called the 4th respondent to submit his documents
and evidence for reconsideration.  However, his tender was reconfirmed as he had sufficient
experience with reputed clients though not a registered as a second-class hotelier.  The appellant
who desired to offer his quotation to the tender dropped his thought as he did not fulfill certain
conditions as mentioned in the invitation of the Airport authorities.  Upon hearing that, the 4th
respondent was a successful bidder despite of him not fulfilling the required conditions, the
appellant filed a case before Bombay the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution but
the case was dismissed.  Therefore, he appealed to the SC under Article 136 of the
Constitution.10  

10
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs The International Airport on 4 May, 1979 

8|Page
ISSUES

1. What is the meaning of “Registered IInd Class Hoteliers”? What category of persons falls
within the meaning of this description?

2. Whether the acceptance of tender of 4th respondents by the 1st respondents was invalid

and liable to be set aside at the instance of the appellant?

HELD

1. The Court decided in this issue that the aspect of grading is given by the Bombay
Municipal Corporation only to the hotels or restaurants but not to IInd grade hotelier and
the requirement which is given in the notice is that the tender must be a registered IInd
grade hotelier was therefore a meaningless requirement and it could not be regarded as laying down any
condition of eligibility.

The 4th respondents have the experience equivalent to the condition mentioned in the
notice and that is the reason their tender was accepted by the 1 st respondent. There is no
statutory or administrative law requiring the 1st respondent to give a contract only by
tenders, they could have given the contract directly to the 4 th respondent because it was
clearly mentioned in the contract that there is no obligation on the 1 st respondent to accept
all the tenders. But still they did not give the tender directly.11

2. The appellant was just a mere stranger and didn’t submit any tender to the 1 st respondent
but still he filed writ petition. There was no locus standi to maintain the petition. That
means, if the appellant didn’t enter into the competition by submitting a tender, so
nothing should be affected to him. The grievance was that 1st respondent accepted the
tender of the 4threspondents and said that in the notice it is written that the non-
fulfillment of eligibility will be no bar to consideration of a tender, which is not known

11
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs The International Airport on 4 May, 1979
9|Page
 by the appellant and that is the reason he didn’t submit the tender due to the eligibility
criteria.
It was violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India which is Right to Equality. 
Now, this was justified in law or not that the court had to decide.
The court held that the power of license or accepting the tender is in the hands of the
Government; here it is in the hands of the International Airport Authority of India and it
was also given in the notice. The writ petition was dismissed by the court and then he
filed an appeal in the High Court that too was rejected.

RULES

1. Article 12 of Constitution of India which defines the word ‘State’.

Definition-  In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, “the State” includes the
Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the
States and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the
Government of India.

2. Article 14 of Constitution of India, which is regarding ‘equality before law’.

Equality before law- The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal
protection of the laws within the territory of India.

10 | P a g e
CASE ANALYSIS

ARTICLE 14

In this case, the eligibility criteria of the tender were questioned at the time when the
1st respondent accepted the notice of the 4th respondent for giving him the tender of the restaurant
as well as of the snack bar.

The grievance was that the 1st respondent accepted the tender of the 4th respondent and said that
in the notice it is written that the non-fulfilment of eligibility will be no bar to consideration of a
tender, which is not known by the appellant and that is the reason he didn’t submit the tender due
to the eligibility criteria.

Thus the tender notice stated:

In Paragraph (1) that sealed tenders in the prescribed form were invited from registered second
class hoteliers having at least five years’ experience for putting up and running a second class
restaurant and two snack bars at the Bombay Airport for a period of three years Paragraph (8)
stated that acceptance of the tender would rest with the Airport Director who does not bind
himself to accept any tender and reserves to himself the right to reject all or any of the tenders
received without assigning any reasons therefore. The 1 st respondents claim that it was violation
of Article 14 of the constitution of India which is Right to Equality. Now, this was justified in
law or not that the court had to decide.

The court held that the power of license or accepting the tender is in the hands of the
government; here it is in the hands of the International Airport Authority of India and it was also
given in the notice.

 Regarding the validity of the concluded tender, the Court held that it was a clear
violation of equality under Article 14.  The Court justified its stand on the following
grounds:  The tender never mentioned about the capability of running a second-class
hotel but laid down conditions to be fulfilled which is the basic eligibility criteria and the
same cannot be disregarded by the Airport authorities.  The power reserved by the

11 | P a g e
 authorities was only to completely reject the tender offers and enter into a direct
negotiation with a dealer.  But in the present case the tender offers were taken for
consideration out of which 4th respondent was selected.  Therefore, the power reserved in
the invitation does not apply.  Hence the concluded tender was invalid.  

RIGHT TO EQUALITY IN INDIA vs U.S.

India and the U.S. have numerous similarities, showing their systems are not that dissimilar,
while their ideologies regarding individual rights and substantive equality derive from quite
distinct constitutional frameworks. India's legal system may be most comparable to the U.S.'s,
notably in constitutional law. Both constitutions protect individual rights. Both provide
constitutional courts broad judicial review powers, including the potential to overturn laws, and
both use British common law. 12The Indian strategy of affirmative action, as an example of a
project to improve equality, focuses on erasing the consequences of social hierarchy that have
distributed certain groups' poor socioeconomic position. The focus on the individual or on
groups and the benefits individuals receive based on their place in society's hierarchy
distinguishes these views of equality. 13
President Johnson's acknowledgement of "actual
circumstances of inequality" - both individual reality and social inequity - would have altered
American civic religion. Collective disadvantage helps India achieve more equality. These two
equality techniques give interesting modules.

First, none of these approaches to equality should be pursued in full. Marxism's collectivist,
results-oriented pursuit for substantive equality ignores the intrinsically uneven features of
persons, harms individual liberty, and is ineffective at reducing actual disparities. India's system
protects individual liberties and rights while reaching substantive equality. Early America had a
formalistic, individualist attitude to equality of opportunity, which resonates to this day. It denies
that people born within a social hierarchy have different possibilities and justifies current
inequities by citing legal equality. Second, each strategy results in quite different legal concepts,
such as an effects-based investigation into attaining equality or a formalistic purpose of
12
The Constitution of India, 1948.
13
Constitution of the United States of America, 1787

12 | P a g e
enforcing antidiscrimination. Each standard has drawbacks. Primarily focused with past injustice
and continued social stratification of castes, whereas the Indian approach stresses building a
society free from unfair inequity. Resentment against Indian-style programmes reflects the
shared ideas of individual rights and merit that have precluded their acceptance in the U.S.
Upper-class complaints in India reflect young people's unhappiness about being disadvantaged
and lacking opportunities. Whether their impressions are accurate or not, the clashing ideologies
provide Indian leaders and voters with a tough balancing act.

13 | P a g e
CONCLUSION

In a welfare state, the government regulates and provides special services, employment,
contracts, licences, quotas, mineral rights, etc. Government gives money, perks, services,
contracts, quotas, and licences. Government-issued treasures come in different forms, but all
have one trait. They're replacing conventional riches. 14
These government-related benefits are
diverse. Social security benefits, political cash handouts, and State and local welfare are
included. State, central, and local governments employ thousands.

Many companies and jobs require licences. Giving licences implies withholding them, which
gives the government or its agents influence over many people's lives. Government contracts
benefit many individuals and businesses. They resemble subsidies. Many businesses are set up to
do business with the government since it's nearly difficult to lose money on them. The
government owns hundreds of acres of mineable public property. Companies and individuals can
lease or licence these resources. All of them represent greater government generosity, and as we
move closer to a welfare state, more of our wealth consists of these new forms. Some of these
wealth types may be legal rights, but most are privileges.

The State and its agencies/instruments must work through political bodies and officers/officials
at different levels to achieve the Preamble's Justice and Equality ideals. Parliament and state
legislatures have authorities to enforce laws established to create an equitable society. Political
institutions and officers/officials exercising power to provide services and benefits to the public
always have some discretion, which must be utilised in the public interest.

14
Law Commission 145 Report

14 | P a g e