Article 46 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Article 46 of the Constitution of India is part of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP), found in Part IV of the Constitution. It emphasizes the state's responsibility toward the promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and other weaker sections.
📜 Text of Article 46 – Promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections
“The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.”
✅ Key Features of Article 46:
It is non-justiciable (not enforceable in courts), being a Directive Principle.
Emphasizes affirmative action for SCs/STs and other weaker sections.
Seeks social justice, education, and economic upliftment.
Supports reservation policies and welfare schemes in India.
⚖️ Important Case Laws Related to Article 46
1. State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951 AIR 226)
Issue: Whether caste-based reservations in educational institutions violate fundamental rights.
Judgment: Supreme Court held that Directive Principles (like Article 46) cannot override Fundamental Rights (like Article 15).
Significance: Led to the First Constitutional Amendment (1951), inserting Article 15(4) allowing special provisions for advancement of SCs/STs and backward classes.
2. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992 AIR 450)
Also known as: Mandal Commission Case
Issue: Whether reservations in public employment for OBCs are valid.
Judgment: Court upheld 27% reservation for OBCs but disallowed reservations in promotions.
Relevance to Article 46: The Court recognized the relevance of Article 46 in supporting welfare and upliftment measures for weaker sections.
3. M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212
Issue: Validity of constitutional amendments allowing reservations in promotions for SCs/STs.
Judgment: Upheld the amendments but added that the State must show quantifiable data on backwardness.
Significance: Reinforced the role of Article 46 in policy decisions for equity and affirmative action.
4. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008) 6 SCC 1
Issue: Constitutional validity of 27% OBC reservation in educational institutions (under Article 15(5)).
Judgment: Upheld the law but disallowed creamy layer from availing benefits.
Relevance: The judgment cited Article 46 to support the goal of social justice through education.
📌 Conclusion:
Article 46 reflects the constitutional commitment to social upliftment. Though not enforceable in court, it strongly influences legislation, reservation policies, and government schemes aimed at reducing inequality and supporting disadvantaged communities.
RELATED Blog
0 comments