印度妇女横向保留制的应用:最高法院解决的难题

Senu Nizar, Mayank Pandey
{"title":"印度妇女横向保留制的应用:最高法院解决的难题","authors":"Senu Nizar, Mayank Pandey","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2022.2161241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The authors discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Saurav Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh, which relates to reservation for women candidates in public offices under Articles 15(3) and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. The question which arose for consideration was whether candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, or Scheduled Tribes categories could be accommodated to the open category on securing the cut-off marks prescribed for candidates in the open category – which was answered in the affirmative. We first analyse the position of law as it stood prior to the decision. Then, we go on to analyse the judgement in detail, including an intersectional analysis from the perspective of “women” as a class. The authors also critique the judgement for its overemphasis on merit while resolving the dispute in question. Finally, the authors discuss the importance of providing relaxations and concessions to the reserved candidates.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of horizontal reservation for women in India: the conundrum resolved by the supreme court\",\"authors\":\"Senu Nizar, Mayank Pandey\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24730580.2022.2161241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The authors discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Saurav Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh, which relates to reservation for women candidates in public offices under Articles 15(3) and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. The question which arose for consideration was whether candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, or Scheduled Tribes categories could be accommodated to the open category on securing the cut-off marks prescribed for candidates in the open category – which was answered in the affirmative. We first analyse the position of law as it stood prior to the decision. Then, we go on to analyse the judgement in detail, including an intersectional analysis from the perspective of “women” as a class. The authors also critique the judgement for its overemphasis on merit while resolving the dispute in question. Finally, the authors discuss the importance of providing relaxations and concessions to the reserved candidates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2022.2161241\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2022.2161241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者讨论了最高法院在Saurav Yadav诉北方邦一案中的判决,该判决涉及根据印度宪法第15(3)条和第16(1)条保留女性候选人担任公职。引起审议的问题是,属于其他落后阶级、排名表种姓或排名表部落类别的候选人是否可以在确保为公开类别候选人规定的分数线的情况下被纳入公开类别- -对此的答复是肯定的。我们首先分析在该决定之前法律的立场。然后,我们对这一判断进行了详细的分析,包括从“女性”作为一个阶级的角度进行的交叉分析。作者还批评该判决在解决争议时过分强调优点。最后,作者讨论了为保留考生提供放松和让步的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Application of horizontal reservation for women in India: the conundrum resolved by the supreme court
ABSTRACT The authors discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Saurav Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh, which relates to reservation for women candidates in public offices under Articles 15(3) and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. The question which arose for consideration was whether candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, or Scheduled Tribes categories could be accommodated to the open category on securing the cut-off marks prescribed for candidates in the open category – which was answered in the affirmative. We first analyse the position of law as it stood prior to the decision. Then, we go on to analyse the judgement in detail, including an intersectional analysis from the perspective of “women” as a class. The authors also critique the judgement for its overemphasis on merit while resolving the dispute in question. Finally, the authors discuss the importance of providing relaxations and concessions to the reserved candidates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信