JURISPRUDENCE

“JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

TO EQUALITY IN INDIA-AN ANALYSIS”

Submitted To the Tamil Nadu National Law University in Fulfilment of the

Requirement for the Award of the Degree of B.com.LLB (Hons)

AKASH V
(BC0210005)

Submitted to
Prof.NIDEESH KUMAR
Assistant professor of law
Jurisprudence

TAMIL NADU NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

(A state university established by act no.9 of 2012)

TIRUCHIRAPALLI-620027
 DECLARATION
I, Akash V, Registration No. BC0210005, hereby declare that this research paper work entitled as
“Judicial interpretation of fundamental right to equality in India-an analysis” been originally

carried out by me under the guidance of Prof NIDEESH KUMAR, Assistant professor of Law, Tamil Nadu
National Law University (TNNLU) Tiruchirapalli-620027. This work has not been submitted either in
whole or in part of any degree/ diploma at any university.

Place: Tiruchirappalli
Date: 05.05.2023 AKASH V
 Contents

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................3

1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM...............................................................................................4

1.2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...................................................................................................5

1.3. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................5

1.4. RESEARCH METHDOLOGY...............................................................................................5

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE.....................................................................................................6

3. CHAPTER II................................................................................................................................7

THE JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY...............................7

THE JURISPRUDENTIAL EVOLUTION OF EQUALITY.......................................................8

4. CHAPTER III..............................................................................................................................9

JOHN RAWLS IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY....................................................................9

ARISTOTLE IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY......................................................................10

PLATO IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY...............................................................................11

5. CHAPTER IV............................................................................................................................12

ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION AND VARIOUS PHILOSOPHERS OF RIGHT

TO EQUALITY.............................................................................................................................12

 COMPARING WITH JOHN RAWLS............................................................................12

 COMPARING WITH ARISTOTLE................................................................................13

 COMPARING WITH PLATO.........................................................................................14

6. CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................15

7. BIBILIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................15
1. INTRODUCTION

The right to equality is an essential principle of justice and fairness in every democratic society.
Article 14 of the Indian Constitution provides the right to equality and prohibits discrimination
based on religion, race, caste, gender, or place of birth. The Indian judiciary has been significant in
interpreting and broadening the scope of the Fundamental Right to Equality. The courts have
moved beyond a strict interpretation of Article 14 to include the concepts of justice and fairness,
which are essential components of equality.

Jurisprudence philosophers such as John Rawls, Aristotle and Plato have contributed to the
understanding and development of the concept of equality. Rawls' theory of justice as fairness
emphasizes the importance of equal basic liberties, equal opportunities, and distributive justice in
ensuring a just society. Sen's capability approach focuses on the ability of individuals to achieve
their goals and lead fulfilling lives, and how unequal opportunities and capabilities can lead to
social injustice.
In interpreting the Fundamental Right to Equality, the Indian judiciary has drawn inspiration from
these ideas, emphasizing the need of ensuring not just insignificant equality but also substantive
equality. This has resulted in the establishment of the notion of affirmative action, which tries to
advance the interests of historically excluded and oppressed groups by allowing them to participate
in society's mainstream.

1.1STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The Indian judiciary through its Art. 14 jurisprudence has put forth various conceptions of equality
to establish justice. Additionally, various philosophers have derived notions of equality through
various schools of thought. This paper will try to answer as to how these philosophical notions of
equality compare with the Indian Judiciary’s Art. 14 jurisprudence on right to equality.
 1.2RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

 To understanding of right to equality through judicial interpretation.

 To understanding of right to equality through various philosophers.
 To analysis judicial interpretation and various philosophers of right to equality.

1.3 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

This research is on fundamental rights, article 14 of the Indian Constitution, and Indian case
laws. All of the above will be analyzed and applied to determine if they match with various
philosophers' theories of equality.

This research is restricted to the Indian constitution and Indian case laws.

1.4RESEARCH METHDOLOGY

“This research paper is a doctrinal research paper done with reference to secondary resources
on the forefront such as books, articles and journal reviews. The research is also conducted
based on statutes and rules with relevance to the concepts in research”.
 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 Freund, Paul A. "The philosophy of equality." Wash. ULQ (1979): 11 1. "The

Philosophy of Equality" by Paula Freund is a thorough examination of many philosophic
concepts and theories of equality, covering a wide spectrum of viewpoints from ancient
Greeks to contemporary philosophers. The book presents a comprehensive examination
of the many sorts of equality, the link between equality and justice, and a critical
examination of the various philosophical viewpoints on equality. It is a wonderful
resource for anybody interested in the idea of equality.

 Shiner, Roger A. "Aristotle's Theory of Equity." Loy. LAL Rev. 27 (1993): 1245 2.
Shiner Roger's book "Aristotle and the Concept of Equality" examines Aristotle's idea of
equality throughout his works. Shiner argues that Aristotle's view of equality is founded
on a proportionate distribution of goods and advantages based on merit and desert, rather
than a formal equality of rights or opportunities, as is the case with modern-day notions
of equality. The book also examines the philosopher's views on the role of the state in
establishing equality, as well as the significance of his equality theory in modern
discussions over distributive justice.

 Khaitan, Tarunabh. "Equality: legislative review under article 14." The Oxford

Handbook of Indian Constitutional Law (OUP 2016) (2015): 699-7193. The concept of
equality under India's constitutional framework is examined in Khaitan's article, along
with the judiciary's role in assessing legislative actions that contravene the right to
equality granted by Article 14. He examines the Indian judiciary's strategy for examining
legislative acts for conformity with the equality guarantee of Article 14 and traces the
historical development of the idea of equality in India's constitutional past. Khaitan
distinguishes three different methods for conducting this review: substantive equality,
formal equality, and the anti-classification principle. He contends that the use of these
strategies by the Indian judiciary to combat discrimination based on caste, gender, and
sexual orientation has been successful.

1
Freund, Paul A. "The philosophy of equality." Wash. ULQ (1979): 11
2
“Shiner, Roger A. "Aristotle's Theory of Equity." Loy. LAL Rev. 27 (1993): 1245”
3
“Khaitan, Tarunabh. "Equality: legislative review under article 14." The Oxford Handbook of Indian
Constitutional Law (OUP 2016) (2015): 699-719”
3. CHAPTER II

THE JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY

Articles 14 through 18 of the Indian Constitution protect the right to equality. "One of the
magnificent cornerstones of Indian democracy is equality." The broad concept of "Right to
Equality" defines itself and does not require elaboration. The "Right to Equality" is
guaranteed under Article 14 of Indian law. It is considered a fundamental right. It assures that
everyone has the right to equality before the law and equal protection under the law. The
doctrine of equality before the law is an unavoidable implication of the "rule of law" that
pervades the Indian constitution. 4
STATE OF WEST BENGAL V ANWAR ALI SARKAR, 1952 AIR 75 SC

The West Bengal Special Courts Act, 1950 was created with the aim of ensuring that certain
offences are tried more quickly. In Section 3 of the Act, the State Government was given the
power to create special courts. Section 5, which was challenged for its constitutionality,
allowed these special courts to handle such offences as directed by the State Government.
Someone challenged Section 5, arguing that there was no clear reason for categorizing
different offences under the Act.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Act was invalid because it gave the government the power
to classify offences or groups of offences at their own discretion, which was considered
arbitrary. The Act did not provide any specific policy or guideline for the classification of
these types of offences. The appellant was given different treatment due to the provision. It's
not reasonable to use the need for a quick trial as the only factor to determine a valid
classification. It's too vague and uncertain. This particular case played a significant role in
establishing the fundamental principles of Article 14.

RAM KRISHNA DALMIA V. JUSTICE TENDOLKAR, AIR 1958 SC 538

The Supreme Court is discussing the concept of equality before the law in this particular case.
In this case, the well-known "classification test" was administered. In simpler terms, this
means that the State can classify people into different groups as long as there is a clear reason
for doing so and it is related to the goal they want to achieve. This is allowed even though
Article 14 would normally prohibit such discrimination. The key is that the differences

4
“Nikhil Gangappa Mantur. (n.d.). “Right to equality: It is basic feature of our Constitution.” penacclaims.
Retrieved from http://www.penacclaims.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Nikhil-Mantur.pdf”
between the groups must be easy to understand and there must be a logical connection
between the classification and the desired outcome.

E.P. ROYAPPA V. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, 1974 AIR 555

In this case, Bhagwati, J. introduced the second test of Article 14, which is commonly known
as the "new doctrine" or the "arbitrariness test". The test suggests that Article 14's concept of
equality also encompasses protection against arbitrary actions by the State. The Supreme
Court has come to appreciate this test over time. Even though it is not very specific, it has
been used several times to declare State action as going beyond the limits of Article 14.

Indra Sawhney v UOI, AIR 1993 SC 477

This case is a significant decision regarding the topic of reservation in India. The Court
analysed how Article 14 and Article 16 are related to each other. Some legal experts believe
that Article 16(1) is a part of Article 14. Article 16(1) also allows for reasonable
classification, just like Article 14. When something is classified, it may sometimes mean that
certain seats or vacancies are set aside for a specific purpose. Article 14 and 16 have the main
goal of promoting equality and equal opportunities. Clause (4) of Article 16 is a tool to help
achieve this objective. We need to ensure that both provisions are in agreement with each
other, as they both reflect the principle of equality stated in Article 14.

SHAYARA BANO V UOI, WP (C) 118/2016

The Supreme Court has made a ruling on the Triple Talaq Case, stating that the act of
instantaneous triple talaq [Talaq-ul-biddat] is unconstitutional. The judges noted that Article
14 of the Constitution guarantees the fundamental right to equality, which includes equal
status for all. The values of gender equality, gender equity, and gender justice are closely
linked to the assurance of equality as stated in Article 14. Granting social status solely based
on patriarchal values or at the mercy of men goes against the principles outlined in Articles
14 and 15 of the Constitution.
4. CHAPTER III

JOHN RAWLS IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY

In "A Theory of Justice," John Rawls presents his ideas on justice and how it should be
applied in society. Rawls' political theory is based on the concept of "justice as fairness."
According to him, a fair society is established on principles of justice that are acceptable to
everyone, regardless of their personal interests or social status. Rawls believed that for a
society to be fair, every member should have the same basic rights and liberties. Rawls' work
offers a thorough explanation of the concept that later became known as liberal equality. This
statement doesn't have the passionate tone of advocating for equal rights and opportunities for
all individuals in a socialist society. But it doesn't matter. What makes a vision of equality
appealing is not the name it's given, but rather the actual substance of the vision itself. In any
event, Rawls considered his theory as consistent with both capitalism and socialism. Rawls'
theory of justice has significant implications for the concept of equality.

Rawls believed that justice requires treating all individuals as equal citizens, without any
discrimination based on their race, gender, religion, or any other irrelevant characteristics.
This concept of equality is fundamental to justice, according to Rawls. According to Rawls, it
is important to ensure that the concept of equality is upheld in both political and social
institutions. This can be achieved by implementing legal and constitutional safeguards.

In "A Theory of Justice," Rawls introduced the idea of the "original position." This is a
hypothetical scenario where people have to determine the principles of justice that would
govern their society without any knowledge of their own social status or personal
preferences. Rawls argues that people would naturally prefer justice principles that are based
on fairness and equality, especially in situations where arbitrary factors such as race or
gender could put them at a disadvantage. Rawls' theory of justice has influenced disputes
over equality in a variety of fields, including education, healthcare, and income distribution.
Rawls maintained that a just society must give equal opportunity for all persons, regardless of
their social or economic background, to accomplish their objectives and dreams. This
necessitates not only assuring access to education and healthcare, but also tackling systemic
wealth and income disparities5.

5
Rawls, John. A theory of justice: Revised edition. Harvard university press, 2020.
ARISTOTLE IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY
Aristotle discussed the idea of equality. According to Aristotle, treating everyone equally did
not necessarily mean treating them all the same way. He believed that it was important to
treat people fairly based on their individual talents and abilities, rather than treating everyone
the same. When we talk about fairness in terms of distributing resources and opportunities
based on people's needs and abilities, we often call it "distributive justice."

Aristotle doesn't often talk about equality in a straightforward way or as a separate topic from
his broader political arguments. Although he doesn't explicitly state his opinion on equality,
he does make statements that give us a hint about his stance. These statements are related to
economic equality, not just civil and political equality. Having equality in society can
enhance the political system and potentially create a path for democracy to be morally
upright.

According to Aristotle, achieving this kind of equality requires a particular organisation of

society. According to him, the perfect political system would be the one where power is
distributed among various socioeconomic classes. This approach could be useful in
preventing a single group from gaining too much power and exerting control over others.

Aristotle acknowledged that not all individuals possessed the same level of ability to engage
in politics at the same time. In his opinion, some people are better equipped to lead than
others. He believed that it was important to create a system that would enable these
individuals to rise to positions of authority. He stressed the significance of restricting the
authority of people in power to avoid any misuse of power and to make sure that the
requirements of all members of the community are became acquainted6.

Aristotle's views on equality extended to issues of gender and slavery. While he did not
advocate for complete equality between men and women, he did recognize that women
possessed certain abilities and skills that were valuable to society. Like many people of his
time, he believed that slavery was a normal part of human society. However, he also believed
that slaves deserved to be treated justly and with dignity. He even thought that if a slave
proved their worth, they should have the opportunity to even their freedom 7.

6
“Cuellar, Norma G. "Justice is equality... but equality of what?(Aristotle)." Journal of Transcultural
Nursing 32.2 (2021): 93-93”.
7
“Von Leyden, Wolfgang. Aristotle on equality and justice: His political argument. Springer, 1985”.
PLATO IDEA OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY
Plato was a philosopher who believed that justice and equality were crucial for creating a fair
and balanced society. His philosophy centered around these concepts and their importance in
society. He believed that every person possessed a soul that could reason and that all souls
were of equal worth. Plato believed that every person should be treated with dignity and
respect, regardless of their background or identity. He was against discrimination and
marginalisation of any kind.

Plato envisioned an ideal state, which he called the Republic, where all citizens would be
treated fairly and have equal opportunities to succeed. In this system, a philosopher-king
would be responsible for governing the state. Their main duties would include ensuring
justice is served and treating all citizens fairly. According to Plato, the philosopher-king
would make the best ruler because they possess a deep understanding of reality and can use
reason to make decisions that benefit the people.

Plato believed that every person has a unique role to play in society and that everyone should
have the chance to reach their full potential. This formed the basis of his theory of equality.
He believed that every individual possesses unique talents and abilities that should be
nurtured and utilised for the betterment of society. Plato believed that it was the responsibility
of the state to provide education and training to its citizens so that they could reach their full
potential.

Plato's idea of equality faced opposition from some people. There are some scholars who
believe that his idea of equality was limited because it didn't take into account matters of
gender, race, and sexuality. Plato's vision of an ideal society only allowed male citizens to
participate in politics. Women, slaves, and foreigners were not given the opportunity to be
involved in the political system. In addition, Plato held the belief that society should have a
strict social structure where people were given specific roles based on their skills and talents.
This meant that certain individuals would naturally hold more authority and sway than others.

Despite these criticisms, Plato's philosophy of equality has had a profound influence on
Western thought, inspiring many political and social movements. His vision of a just and fair
society in which every individual is treated with dignity and respect is still a potent ideal that
shapes our concept of human rights and social justice8.

8
Rowe, Christopher J. "Plato on equality and democracy." Democracy, Justice, and Equality in Ancient
Greece: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives (2018): 63-82.
5. CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION AND VARIOUS PHILOSOPHERS

OF RIGHT TO EQUALITY

 CASE OF INDRA SAWHNEY AND RAWLSIAN THEORY OF JUSTICE

Indra Sawhney v union of India, also known as the mandal commission case, is an important
legal ruling that deals with the right to equality as outlined in article 14 of the Indian
constitution.this topic focuses on matter of reserving seats for certain groups of people in
public jobs and schools.
The supreme court looked into whether it was constitution to have reservation policies based
on caste for public employment and higher education. The court ruled that reservation is
constitution,but it also placed some restrictions and requirements on it.
According to the court ruling,reservations for backwards classes should not go beyond 50%
unless there are exceptional circumstances.additionally,these reservations should be
supported by measurable data that shows the underrepresentation od these classes.the court
made it clear that while implementing reservation policies,it is important to ensure that the
principle of efficiency in administration is not compromised and the rights of other
candidates are not undermined.
 COMPARING WITH ARISTOTLE
The right to equality is a basic human right that is protected by several national and
international legal systems. The judiciary's view of this right has developed through time,
influenced by many philosophical positions, especially Aristotle's. According to legal
interpretation, the right to equality prohibits discrimination based on certain traits such as
race, gender, religion, and sexual orientation. This interpretation is founded on the concept
that persons should be treated equally before the law and that any distinction must be justified
and rationally. However, different interpretations of what constitutes a legitimate and rational
basis have resulted in different outcomes in different cases.

One way to understand the right to equality is to apply Aristotle's idea of distributive justice.
Aristotle felt that justice was giving individuals what they deserved based on their merits and
circumstances. This notion has been used to advocate for affirmative action programmes that
try to remedy historical injustices and offer equitable chances for disadvantaged groups.
However, it has also been criticized for potentially perpetuating discrimination against
individuals who are not members of the favored group9.

The concept of proportionality is another manner in which Aristotle's theories have affected
the understanding of the right to equality. According to this principle, any difference or
limitation of a right must be commensurate to the legitimate goal pursued. This technique has
been utilized to establish a compromise between opposing social goals such as national
security and public health. It has, however, been criticized for potentially permitting
violations of the right to equality in the context of achieving legitimate goals.

Various philosophical perspectives, including Aristotle's, have influenced judicial

interpretations of the right to equality. While his ideas have helped to clarify how the right to
equality should be interpreted, they have also been the subject of criticism and debate.
Finally, this right's interpretation must be context-specific and based on a careful examination
of the specific circumstances and values at stake in each case10.

9
Cuellar, Norma G. "Justice is equality... but equality of what?(Aristotle)." Journal of Transcultural
Nursing 32.2 (2021): 93-93.
10
Pojman, Louis. "Theories of equality: A critical analysis." Behavior and philosophy 23.2 (1995): 1-27.
 COMPARING WITH PLATO
The judicial interpretation of the right to equality refers to how courts understand and
implement the idea of equality in instances that come before them. This interpretation can be
impacted by a range of variables, including legal precedent, societal conventions, and the
judges' own ideas and values.

The right to equality is incorporated in many nations' constitutions or other legal instruments,
and courts are charged with preserving it. This might include evaluating laws and regulations
to ensure that they do not discriminate against specific groups, as well as holding government
and other institutions accountable when they do. Determining what constitutes discrimination
is one of the most difficult difficulties in judicial interpretation of the right to equality. Some
forms of discrimination, such as racial or gender discrimination, are fairly obvious and easily
identified. Other types of discrimination, such as those based on socioeconomic status or
sexual orientation, can be more difficult to identify and may necessitate a more nuanced
interpretation. The legal interpretation of the right to equality is critical in ensuring that
people and groups are not discriminated against unfairly and that everyone has equal access
to opportunities and resources.

In terms of Plato's view of equality, it is vital to emphasize that his beliefs differed greatly
from those of current democracies. Individuals were not regarded equal in the sense that they
had equal rights or opportunities in Plato's ideal society 11. Individuals were allocated jobs
within society based on their innate abilities and talents, with the most capable serving as
rulers and the least capable functioning in lower capacities.

Plato's idea of equality was thus founded on the concept of meritocracy, in which people
were rewarded based on their ability rather than their social standing or other external
circumstances. While this concept may have had some appeal in ancient Greece, it is difficult
to apply to modern democracies, which place a much higher value on equal rights and
opportunities for all individuals. Although judicial interpretations of the right to equality have
evolved over time and continue to be an important aspect of modern democracies, Plato's
concept of equality based on meritocracy is not well-suited to modern societies. Modern
democracies, on the other hand, emphasize the significance of equal rights and opportunities
for all persons, regardless of socioeconomic class or ability.

Rowe, Christopher J. "Plato on equality and democracy." Democracy, Justice, and Equality in Ancient
11

Greece: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives (2018): 63-82.

6. CONCLUSION

The judicial interpretation of this right involves interpreting and applying it in specific cases
that come before the courts, while the philosophical perspectives of thinkers such as John
Rawls, Aristotle, and Plato offer additional insights into the concept of equality. While the
philosophical perspectives of Rawls, Aristotle, and Plato offer different insights into the
concept of equality, the judicial interpretation of the right to equality in modern democracies
emphasizes the importance of equal rights and opportunities for all individuals, regardless of
their social status or abilities. The courts play a crucial role in upholding and protecting this
right, by interpreting and applying laws in a manner that is consistent with the right to
equality and by holding governments and other institutions accountable when they engage in
discriminatory practices.

7. BIBILIOGRAPHY

 https://blog.ipleaders.in/blog/

 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00201741003784648?
journalCode=sinq2 0
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
263190722_Equality_in_Law_and_Philosophy

 https://journals.library.wustl.edu/lawreview/article/7589/galley/24422/view/

 Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

 Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

 (PDF) John Rawls as Philosopher of Equality | Attracta Ingram - Academia.edu

 Khaitan, Tarunabh. "Equality: legislative review under article 14." The Oxford

Handbook of Indian Constitutional Law (OUP 2016) (2015): 699-719.

 Rowe, Christopher J. "Plato on equality and democracy." Democracy, Justice, and Equality

in Ancient Greece: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives (2018): 63-82.
 Cuellar, Norma G. "Justice is equality... but equality of what?(Aristotle)." Journal of Transcultural
Nursing 32.2 (2021): 93-93.

 Pojman, Louis. "Theories of equality: A critical analysis." Behavior and philosophy 23.2 (1995): 1-27.