Parameters of Employment Equality

Evidence 1 and Inference 1 are coherent. The explicit phrase 'under the State' renders private employment immune from Article 16 claims. Evidence 2 and Inference 2 are coherent. Article 16(3) is the exact constitutional clause that grants Parliament the power to prescribe residence requirements. Evidence 3 and Inference 3 are contradictory. Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for 'all citizens', making it entirely unavailable to foreign nationals. The correct counterpart is that the right is citizen-exclusive.

The Assertion is correct. A citizen can be denied a job based on residence if a valid Parliamentary law exists. Reason (R1) is true and correctly explains the assertion. The Parliament holds the exclusive power to authorize this exception. Reason (R2) is factually false. Article 16 does NOT apply to private commercial enterprises. The correct counterpart is its restriction to public employment.

Statement 1 is incorrect. State assemblies lack this jurisdiction. The correct counterpart is Parliamentary exclusivity. Statement 2 is correct. Article 16(3) allows the exception, but centralizes the legislative power in the Parliament to prevent rogue regionalism. Statement 3 is incorrect. There is an explicit exception (Article 16(3)), so it is not 'strictly forbidden without exception'.

Statement 1 is incorrect. It does not apply to private firms. The correct counterpart is public sector restriction. Statement 2 is correct. Article 16(3) allows Parliament to set residence requirements. Statement 3 is incorrect. Article 16 is available ONLY to citizens. The correct counterpart is the exclusion of foreign nationals. Statement 4 is correct. The text specifies 'office under the State'. Thus, exactly two statements are correct.