Deliberate sampling: Deliberate sampling is also known as

purposive or non-probability sampling. This sampling method

involves purposive or deliberate selection of particular units of
the universe for constituting a sample which represents the
universe. When population elements are selected for inclusion
in the sample based on the ease of access, it can be called
convenience sampling. If a researcher wishes to secure data
from, say, gasoline buyers, he may select a fixed number of
petrol stations and may conduct interviews at these stations.
This would be an example of convenience sample of gasoline
buyers.

Simple random sampling: This type of sampling is also

known as chance sampling or probability sampling where
each and every item in the population has an equal chance
of inclusion in the sample and each one of the possible sam-
ples, in case of finite universe, has the same probability of
being selected.

(il) Systematic sampling: In some instances the most practi-

cal way of sampling is to select every 15th name on a list,
every 10th house on one side of a street and so on. Sam-
pling of this type is known as systematic sampling. An ele-
ment of randomness is usually introduced into this kind of
sampling by using random numbers to pick up the unit with
which to start.

Stratified sampling: If the population from which a sample is

to be drawn does not constitute a homogeneous group, then
stratified sampling technique is applied so as to obtain a rep-
resentative sample. In this technique, the population is strati-
fied into a number of non-overlapping subpopulations or strata
and sample items are selected from each stratum. If the items
selected from each stratum is based on simple random sam-
pling the entire procedure, first stratification and then simple
random sampling, is known as stratified random sampling.

(V) Quota sampling: In stratified sampling the cost of taking

random samples from individual strata is often so expensive
that interviewers are simply given quota to be filled from dif-
ferent strata, the actual selection of items for sample being
left to the interviewer's judgement. This is called quota sam-
pling. The size of the quota for each stratum is generally pro-
portionate to the size of that stratum in the population.

(vi) Cluster sampling and area sampling: Cluster sampling in-

volves grouping the population and then selecting the groups
or the clusters rather than individual elements for inclusion in
the sample. Suppose some departmental store wishes to sam-
ple its credit card holders. It has issued its cards to 15,000
customers. The sample size is to be kept say 450. For cluster
sampling this list of 15,000 card holders could be formed into
100 clusters of 150 card holders each. Three clusters might
then be selected for the sample randomly. The sample size
must often be larger than the simple random sample to ensure
the same level of accuracy because is cluster sampling proce-
dural potential for order bias and other sources of error is usu-
ally accentuated. Area sampling is quite close to cluster sam-
pling and is often talked about when the total geographical
area of interest happens to be big one. Under area sampling
we first divide the total area into a number of smaller non-
overlapping areas, generally called geographical clusters,
then a number of these smaller areas are randomly selected,
and all units in these small areas are included in the sample.
Area sampling is specially helpful where we do not have the
list of the population concerned.

(vil) Multi-stage sampling: This is a further development of the

idea of cluster sampling. This technique is meant for big in-
quiries extending to a considerably large geographical area
like an entire country. Under multi-stage sampling the first
stage may be to select large primary sampling units such as
states, then districts, then towns and finally certain families
within towns. If the technique of random-sampling is applied
at all stages, the sampling procedure is described as multi-
stage random sampling.
(vii) Sequential sampling: This is somewhat a complex sample
design where the ultimate size of the sample is not fixed in ad-
vance but is determined according to mathematical decisions
on the basis of information yielded as survey progresses. This
design is usually adopted under acceptance sampling plan in
the context of statistical quality control

Four rules of interpretation

Literal -“Where the meaning of the statutory words is plain and

unambiguous it is not then for the judges to invent fancied am-
biguities as an excuse for failing to give effect to its plain
meaning because they consider the consequences for doing
so would be inexpedient, or even unjust or immoral.”

Golden - “The grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is

to be adhered to unless that would lead to some absurdity or
some repugnance or inconsistency with the rest of the instru-
ment in which case the grammatical and ordinary sense of the
words may be modified so as to avoid the absurdity and incon-
sistency, but no farther.”

Mischief

This rule gives the court justification for going behind the ac-
tual wording of the statute in order to consider the problem
that the particular statute was aimed at remedying. At one
level it is clearly the most flexible rule of interpretation, but it
is limited to using previous common law to determine what
mischief the Act in question was designed to remedy

Harmonious

The term harmonious construction refers to such construction

by which harmony or oneness amongst various provisions of
an enactment is arrived at. When the words of statutory provi-
sion bear more than one meaning and there is a doubt as to
which meaning should prevail, then such meaning should be
adopted by which the words best harmonize with the subject
and the subject of the enactment.

Justice as a quality of law:Hart argues justice is only one of

the moral considerations involved in the evaluation of law pos-
itivism as an approach. Justice, in law, being primarily a ques-
tion of 'fairness' either in terms of the distribution of burdens
and benefits between groups (Article 14), redressal of injuries
(Bhopal) In a legal context, justice can be applied as an evalu-
ative criteria to both norms as well as processes, institutions,
agents and outcomes proportionality

'Like cases': One of the oldest formulations of a principle of

justice in the legal context is 'treat like cases alike' and the
corollary 'treat different cases differently' however, Hart ar-
gues that by itself this is an incomplete principle. What com-
pletes it in a normative sense is having a standard for deter-
mining 'like' and 'unlike' consider the questions of gender we
were discussing in the last class and in the context of non-
discrimination in employment for Hart, this precept provides
the constant value of justice, while the determination of 'like-
ness' is the subjective or variable value In the context of ap-
plication of law this criteria is a guarantee of impartial
process and procedural standards. In this sense, impartial and
universal application of law could itself said to create 'justice
as legal conformity' consider the example of 'constitutional
morality' put forward by Ambedkar in this context.

'Just law': However, in the context of the substance of law,

evaluations and expectations of justice are much harder value
pluralism makes determination of relevant criteria much
harder, as these are ultimately driven by moral and not purely
legal considerations relative need and capacities as important
considerations of justice. For Hart, the primary consideration
of justice with respect to law is whether the law is distribut-
ing benefits and burdens on the basis of the basic precept of
justice and any contradiction from this is clearly spelt out and
defended. This is not a purely consequentialist evaluation,
however it does require us to analyze how the law actually im-
pacts different social groups.Compensation: The basic princi-
ple of justice is also the basis for evaluating law concerned
with the compensation for injury it should not create unfair
privileges (consider evolution of 'sovereign immunity'). it
should provide remedies for acts considered morally wrong.

The law creates conditions for reciprocity in cooperation, and

by proscribing basic harms against persons, creates the foun-
dation of morality. For Hart therefore, morality is ultimately
about how we target each other and expect to be treated and
institutes a nonnative equality Compensatory legal norms re-
turn parties to the moral status quo and hence to the status of
being moral equals once more Exceptions: Law as an institu-
tion must serve other ends besides justice, and in many cases
can legitimately violate the principle of 'treat like cases alike'
in order to serve another, equally compelling end 'strict liabil-
ity' as an example of a punishment accorded without neces-
sarily proving either direct culpability or intention to harm. For
Hart, social justice is not merely a question of 'treating like
cases alike' but also includes general considerations of social
welfare and other goods In such cases, even though there may
not be like treatment, procedural fairness would ensure that
the law in question is legitimate This tension between the in-
dividualized justice of law and the larger conception justice as
social good is what leads to writers like Young seeking to
broaden our notions of justice Institutions,

Individuals and Ambedkar on the Constitution of India Design-

ing justice. Ambedkar defends both the comparative approach
of constitution making, and constitutionally protecting admin-
istration. Here the substance of justice (the provisions of the
Constitution) is inextricably connected to the forms of author-
ity and rule (administration). consider this in the light of Sen's
"comprehensive outcome analysis"

Ambedkar's defence of administrative provisions is both insti-

tutional and ethical. "Constitutional morality" is a normative
belief amongst persons over shared agreement on the basic
institutional norms of society. contrast Ambedkar's use of
Grote and administration with how Rawls attempts to justify a
similar consensus. Ambedkar's critique of 'traditional' Indian
villages as an example of critical v. conventional Morality.

Practising justice. Ultimately however, Ambedkar sees the

larger achievement of constitutional aims to be a factor pri-
marily of social ("the people") and political (".. .political par-
ties they will set up... "). In this analysis, the normative and
the institutional play an important, but ultimately limited,
framing role. This would come about primarily by Indian soci-
ety and polity adopting the methods of constitutional morality.
The "comprehensive doctrines" of communism and socialism
are regulated by the agreement over
acceptable practice in a constitutional democracy. does
Ambedkar's usage of the phrase "grammar of Anarchy" imply
he sees justice as a product of (an ethical) order? Justice in
the soil: However, Ambedkar sees the very society it seeks to
govern as the greatest weakness of this new constitutional
morality and form of government. These are: a. cultural norms
regarding legitimacy of authority (Bhakti and Weberian
charisma) b. socio-economic structures of value and worth

Foreshadowing Sen, Rawls and Okin, Ambedkar draws a dis-

tinction between the political worth of constitutional and legal
rights (expression, association, franchise etc.) and the social
context of hierarchy and degradation within which these
rights operate. Ambedkar places equal weight on fraternity as
he does on equality and liberty. For him (and many others in
the Assembly) a sense of unified belonging is essential both
for the legitimacy of the state and
for achieving it's goals. why, given what were seen as the in-
herent contradictions of Indian society and this new order.

Ratio Decidendi and Obiter Dicta

A judicial statement of what we commonly refer to as a judge-

ment in a legal case consists of two different elements which
are referred to as Ratio Decidendi or Ratio and Obiter Dicta or
Obiter.
Ratio in Latin means the reason for the decision or judgement
while obiter usually refers to additional opinions or observa-
tions that are made on the issues that are involved in the
case.Obiter very often reveals the rationale that the court has
adopted to come to a conclusion and it is the non-binding part
of the judgement.

Ratio Decidendi
In an ordinary sense, we refer to as ratio the reason behind
the decision but actually, it is much more than that.The rea-
son in this regard is not merely applying the law to the facts
and coming up with an order.Ratio instead refers to the steps
that are involved to resolve a dispute, this resolution must be
directly related to the issue or issues that are at the core of
the dispute at hand.It must come from disputes of law, not dis-
putes of fact.Ratio Decidendi must be argued in court and the
facts of the precedent case shape the level of generality to
which the later courts decide the level of generality.Ironically
when a precedent has multiple reasons, all reasons are bind-
ing.Ratio becomes a very powerful tool in the hands of a
lawyer and that is why it becomes essential for him to com-
prehend it well.To find the ratio in a judgement one looks at
the abstract principles of law that have been applied to the
facts of that particular case.

Obiter Dicta

Obiter is the term used for remarks made by the judge which
are not binding on the parties to the case.Statements that are
not crucial and refer to hypothetical facts or issues of law not
related to the case also form a part of obiter dicta in a judge-
ment.Unlike ratio, obiter is not the subject of the judicial deci-
sion even if the statements made in this part are correct ac-
cording to law. Wambaugh’s Inversion Test provides that to
determine whether a judicial statement is ratio or obiter, you
should invert the argument, that is to say, ask whether the de-
cision would have been different, had the statement been
omitted. If so, the statement is crucial and is ratio; whereas if
it is not crucial, it is obiter.