Jurisprudence of Affirmative Action

Evidence 1 and Inference 1 are coherent. The SC has repeatedly ruled (including in 2020) that reservations are enabling provisions, not fundamental rights, and thus cannot be compelled via writ. Evidence 2 and Inference 2 are contradictory. The Indra Sawhney (Mandal) ruling explicitly RECOGNIZED the inequality among castes and ALLOWED the state to sub-categorize into 'backward' and 'more backward'. The correct counterpart is that sub-categorization is legally valid. Evidence 3 and Inference 3 are contradictory. The same judgment explicitly stated that backwardness cannot be determined exclusively by economic criteria; it must hinge on social condition. The correct counterpart is that pure economic classification for general backwardness is invalid.

The Assertion is correct. Pure economic criteria are insufficient for establishing general OBC backwardness. Reason (R1) is true and explains the assertion. The Indra Sawhney case prioritized social condition to address systemic discrimination rather than transient poverty. Reason (R2) is factually false. There is no fundamental right to reservation, regardless of income. The correct counterpart is that reservation remains a state discretion.

Statement 1 is incorrect. The SC expressly forbade determining backwardness exclusively via economic criteria. The correct counterpart is that poverty alone does not equal backwardness. Statement 2 is correct. Social condition is the bedrock metric established by the Indra Sawhney verdict. Statement 3 is incorrect. The state CAN sub-categorize, and reservation is NOT a fundamental right.

Statement 1 is incorrect. The Supreme Court has clarified that it is an enabling provision, not a fundamental right. The correct counterpart is that quotas are discretionary state policies. Statement 2 is correct. The Indra Sawhney case legally recognized and permitted this sub-categorization. Statement 3 is incorrect. Backwardness cannot be determined exclusively by economic criteria. The correct counterpart is that social conditions must dictate backwardness status. Only Statement 2 is correct.