Tag: #Directiveprinciplesofstatepolicy

S.no	Contents
1.	Introduction
2.	Types of Hazardous Wastes
3.	Legislator Framework in India
4.	Regulatory Framework in India
5.	Ineffectiveness of Law
6.	Case Laws of Hazardous Wastes
7.	Conclusion

Abstract

This article aims to present an overview of hazardous waste and types of hazardous waste. Further it explain the legislative and regulatory framework in India and after that ineffectiveness of the Law.

Introduction

Human beings always create waste materials which are produced by daily to daily life activities. Activities like washing utensils, washing the floor and sewage water.

Hazardous waste means “danger”. Hazardous waste is very dangerous for our life. Hazardous waste includes so many wastes like harmful medicines, harmful chemicals and harmful industrial waste. Hazardous waste affects our lives in so many ways our skin gets irritated, our eyes become red, breathing rate problems and hair problems create. Pesticides are also included in hazardous waste.

Hazardous waste is very toxic for us and hazardous waste creates so many diseases. Hazardous waste is created by pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and industrial and commercial areas. Hazardous waste means any material that is potentially catastrophic to the environment or human health. This type of waste includes chemicals, toxins, flammable materials, and radioactive substances. Hazardous waste can come from a variety of sources, including industrial processes, medical facilities, and households.

The proper handling and disposal of hazardous waste are crucial to prevent harm to humans and the environment. When not handled properly, hazardous waste can contaminate water, soil, and air, leading to serious health problems, including cancer, birth defects, and neurological disorders.

To reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated, it is important to implement practices such as reducing the use of hazardous materials, reusing products when possible, and recycling. In addition, it is essential to properly label and store hazardous waste and to dispose of it in a safe and environmentally friendly manner.

Types of Hazardous Wastes

There are four classifications of hazardous wastes are as follows –
F-list waste
K-list waste
P-list waste
U-list waste

F-LIST WASTE –
It is a classification of hazardous waste. It doesn’t come from a specific industry. It comes from a mix industry. We didn’t identify the industry of F-waste.

F-list waste includes –
Dioxin-bearing wastes
Wood-preserving wastes
Chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons
Spent solvent wastes

K-LIST WASTE –
After the F-list, we read about the k-list. K-list waste is more specific than F-list. We identify the industry of k-list waste. The k-list waste came from industrial waste.

K-list waste includes –
Organic chemicals manufacturing
Primary aluminium production
Ink formulation
Petroleum refining

P-LIST WASTE –
After the K-list waste, we read about P-list. P-list waste is highly toxic. P-list wastes are unused and they are a part of commercial chemical products. Pesticides are part of the P-list.

U-LIST WASTE –
After the U-list waste, we read about U-list, U-list waste is less toxic as compared to the list. We use U-list waste properly so they are not hazardous for us but we do not use them properly so they are hazardous for us.

Legislator Framework in India

Human beings’ duty is to protect nature for natural resources for the future. In Constitution, Part IV-A ( Article 51-A fundamental duties ) says that every human being duty to protect nature against hazardous waste and any other kind of danger. Human beings use natural resources for the future so they have a responsibility to take care the nature.
Further, Part IV (Article 48A directive principles of State Policies) says that the state also has a duty to protect nature and take proper actions to protect nature.

State and human beings have equal responsibilities to protect nature. A well-developed framework came after the UN Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm,1972). After the Stockholm Conference, the National Council for Environmental Policy and Planning was established in 1972 inside the Department of Science and Technology to introduce a regulatory body to look after environment-related issues. Later, This Council developed into an entire Ministry of Environment and Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CL).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste disposal through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This law establishes levels for the management of hazardous waste, consisting of essentials for its transportation, generation, storage, treatment, and disposal.

Businesses and organizations that generate hazardous waste must comply with RCRA regulations by obtaining permits and implementing proper waste management practices. Failure to obey these rules can result in fines and other penalties.

Regulatory Framework in India

The regulatory framework for hazardous waste varies by country, but in general, it involves a combination of national and international laws and regulations. Here are some key components of the regulatory framework for hazardous waste:

• National laws and regulations: Many countries have national laws and regulations that govern the generation, handling, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste. For example, in the United States, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sets standards for the management of hazardous waste, while in the European Union, the Waste Framework Directive provides a framework for the management of waste, including hazardous waste.
• International conventions and agreements: Several international conventions and agreements have been established to address hazardous waste on a global scale. These consist of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, which monitors the current of hazardous waste between countries, and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which seeks to eliminate or restrict the use of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
• Permitting and reporting requirements: Many countries require permits for facilities that generate, handle, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste. These permits may require facilities to meet certain standards for waste management and may include reporting requirements for the amount and type of waste generated.
• Enforcement mechanisms: Laws and regulations related to hazardous waste typically include enforcement mechanisms, such as fines, penalties, and criminal sanctions for non-compliance. In addition, regulatory agencies may conduct inspections and audits of facilities to ensure compliance with the regulations.
• Monitoring and tracking: Many countries have systems in place to monitor and track hazardous waste, from its generation to its final disposal. This may include the use of tracking manifests, electronic reporting systems, and inspections of waste transporters and disposal facilities.

Overall, the regulatory framework for hazardous waste is designed to protect human health and the environment by ensuring that hazardous waste is managed safely and responsibly. By implementing effective regulations and enforcing them consistently, countries can reduce the risks associated with hazardous waste and minimize its impact on the environment.

India has proper amendments about hazardous wastes are as follows –

• First Amendments Rules, 06.07.2016
  In the exercise of powers given by sections 6, 8 and 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 ( 29 of 1986), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules to amend the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, namely:-
  • These rules may be known as Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Amendment Rules, 2016.
  • They shall come into exercise on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
• Second Amendments Rules, 28.02.2017
• Third Amendments Rules, 11.06.2018
• Fourth Amendments Rules, 01.03.2019
• Second Amendments Rules, 12.11.2021
• Sixth Amendments Rules, 21.07.2022

Ineffectiveness of Law

While there are laws and regulations in place to manage hazardous waste, there are still several factors that can lead to the ineffectiveness of these laws. Here are a few reasons why hazardous waste laws may be ineffective:

1. Inadequate enforcement: Even with strong regulations and penalties for non-compliance, the laws may not be effective if they are not enforced consistently and rigorously. Lack of funding, resources, and political will can all contribute to inadequate enforcement.
2. Loopholes and exemptions: Some hazardous waste laws may contain exemptions or loopholes that allow certain industries or activities to avoid compliance. For example, some laws may not apply to small businesses or may have less stringent requirements for certain types of waste.
3. Lack of transparency: In some cases, hazardous waste may be illegally dumped or transported without proper documentation or tracking. This can make it difficult to identify and hold responsible parties accountable for their actions.
4. Rapidly evolving technology and waste streams: Hazardous waste laws may not keep up with the rapid pace of technological innovation and changing waste streams. New types of waste and emerging technologies for waste management may not be adequately covered by existing laws, leaving gaps in regulation.
5. Limited international cooperation: Hazardous waste is a global problem, and effective regulation requires international cooperation and coordination. However, there may be limited cooperation between different countries and regions, leading to disparities in regulation and enforcement.

Overall, the effectiveness of hazardous waste laws depends on a range of factors, including enforcement, exemptions, transparency, technological innovation, and international cooperation. Addressing these issues can help to improve the effectiveness of hazardous waste regulation and protect human health and the environment.

Case Laws of Hazardous Wastes

• Love Canal (1970s): Love Canal was a neighbourhood in Niagara Falls, New York, where Hooker Chemical Company dumped 21,000 tons of toxic waste from the 1940s to the 1950s. In the 1970s, residents began experiencing health problems, and investigations revealed that the waste had contaminated the soil and groundwater. This led to the evacuation of the neighbourhood and the creation of the Superfund program, which provides funding for the cleanup of hazardous waste sites.
• Bhopal disaster (1984): The Bhopal disaster was a gas leak from a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, owned by Union Carbide Corporation. The leak released toxic gas into the air, causing the deaths of over 3,000 people and injuring thousands more. The disaster highlighted the need for better safety regulations for hazardous industries and raised awareness of the environmental and human health impacts of hazardous waste.
• Koko Chemical Company (1988): Koko Chemical Company was a chemical company in Taiwan that illegally dumped hazardous waste, including PCBs, into the ocean. The waste contaminated the fish in the area, leading to a ban on fishing and a public health crisis. The company’s CEO was sentenced to life in prison, and the case led to increased scrutiny of hazardous waste management practices in Taiwan.
• Ivory Coast toxic waste dumping (2006): In 2006, a company called Trafigura chartered a ship to transport hazardous waste from Amsterdam to Ivory Coast. The waste was dumped illegally in various locations around Abidjan, the country’s largest city, leading to thousands of people reporting health problems. The incident prompted calls for stronger regulations on the transport and disposal of hazardous waste.

These cases illustrate the serious consequences that can arise from improper management and disposal of hazardous waste and highlight the importance of regulations and enforcement to protect human health and the environment.

Conclusion

Hazardous waste control by using windmills, solar energy and so many things come from nature so they produce less waste. We use natural things instead of made chemicals. Chemicals are full of toxicity. Chemicals are very dangerous for our life and animals also. Dogs and cats and so many animals are also in danger with us. Hazardous wastes are very dangerous for small children. Pregnant women and elders are also away from hazardous wastes. 

We take proper steps to get over this problem as follows – 

• We use natural things
• We don’t use plastic bags 
• Sewage waste 

In Delhi, a huge mountain is formed by waste so this is dangerous for our life. Due to this Ganga is also polluted and in festivals, we bathe in Ganga and do puja also due to the puja waste increase. Diya’s and flowers float in Ganga. We control this custom so that our future generation enjoy the fresh air and Ganga. We buy clothes so mindlessly due to this also waste is produced. We throw packets of milk, Maggi and lays in dustbin and we cannot cut properly so we cannot recycle these packets and they become waste. We mix wet waste and dry waste. We didn’t purchase clothes mindlessly and we cut the packets in a proper way so that we recycle them. 

Some clothes are not recyclable in nature so we cannot use or minimise the usage of that cloth. We didn’t mix the wet and dry waste so that waste is recyclable and that waste does not become hazardous waste. In the current scenario, waste is increasing day by day and they create threatening situations for us we cannot help us. Executive and legislative both make effective laws with sanction so that waste products is decreased. Pollution is created by waste. Pollution is also very bad for our health. 

Overall, it is important to understand the dangers associated with hazardous waste and to take steps to reduce its generation and properly manage and dispose of it. By doing so, we can protect human health and the environment for generations to come.

---

Reference

1. https://cpcb.nic.in/rules/

This article is written by Varsha Goel, a 2nd-year law student at Kurukshetra University.

INTRODUCTION

“The Indian constitution is first and foremost a social document, and it is aided by its Parts III and IV (Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy, respectively) acting together as its chief instruments and conscience in realizing the goals set by it for all people.” The constitution was purposefully written in broad strokes (rather than ambiguous language) to ensure its flexibility. Constitutions are divided into two types: rigid and flexible. A constitution’s rigidity or flexibility is determined by the nature of the amendment. Anytime the ordinary laws and constitutional laws are amended separately, the constitution is rigid. In a flexible constitution, however, the two of them; ordinary laws and constitutional laws can be amended in an identical manner. The Indian Constitution is neither too rigid nor too flexible; rather, it is a hybrid of the two.

THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

The Indian Constitution attempts to strike a balance between rigor and flexibility. A special majority of the Parliament, referring to the two-thirds majority of the members of each house i.e.; Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha present and voting, the majority as well (which should be greater than 50%) of the total membership of each House, can change certain statutes.

Other clauses can be changed with a two-thirds majority in the Parliament and if there is ratification by half of the states. At the same time, there are certain provisions of the Constitution that can be modified in the ordinary legislative process by a simple majority of Parliament. The constitution’s flexibility is enhanced by provisions that allow the parliament to give an addition to the constitution’s provisions with legislation.

The basic structure concept was established in the Kesavananda Bharti case, which has unquestionably strengthened the constitution’s rigor. In fact, if the topic of Basic Structure arises, the Constitution of India is “completely rigorous” according to the Supreme Court. It clarifies that Parliament’s ability to amend the Constitution cannot be used to change, distort, or undermine the Constitution’s core characteristics and principles in any way.

The illustration of India’s constitutional nature has been outlined in this case, which allows for the Parliament to allow changes according to the ever-changing contexts, weighing the importance of such amendments. The Kesavananda case ruling was a thought-provoking, one-of-a-kind, and high-order decision. This 69-day case was meticulously examined, considering every possible outcome of the decision. After a thorough examination of the matter, it was clear that this ruling was required; otherwise, any political party with a two-thirds majority in parliament might propose any alteration that would jeopardize the constitution’s basic structure. Following the implementation of this ruling, the Judiciary, as mandated by the Constitution, is the last arbitrator in determining whether constitutional provisions have been violated. This case overruled Golaknath’s and opened the path for Parliament to fulfill its duty to construct an egalitarian society and welfare state in accordance with the Constitution’s Basic Structure.

This well-known case resulted in the creation of the basic structural theory, which went down in history as saving our constitution and restoring faith in the court, as well as saving the democracy of our country, for which the freedom fighters in the past gave their lives. As a result, the Kesavananda Bharati case has and will continue to have a place in our nation’s constitutional history.

RECENT AMENDMENTS MADE IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

103TH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT,2019
The Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act made in 2019 has altered two fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution, namely Article 15 and Article 16. These two clauses form the foundation of reservation in the realms of education and government employment. The state now has the power to establish a maximum of 10% quota for “economically vulnerable sectors” of citizens by adding two new paragraphs to Articles 15 and 16 of the Indian constitution. As a result, the total bookings over and above the existing program have increased to 59.50 percent.

Discrimination on the basis of race, caste, sex, religion, or place of birth is prohibited by Article 15 of the Indian Constitution. The amendment attempts to offer reservation to individuals who do not fall under 15(5) and 15 (4) (essentially, SCs, STs, and OBCs), i.e. economically disadvantaged sections so that they can be admitted to educational institutions other than the educational institutions for the minority mentioned in clause (1) of Article 30.

Discrimination in government employment is prohibited by Article 16 of the Indian Constitution. With the amendment, Article 16 (6) is inserted to enable reservations in government positions for people from economically disadvantaged groups. The “economic weakness” will now be determined based on “family income” and other “economic disadvantage factors.”

The Rs. 8 lakh income limit and asset restrictions to determine economic backwardness are the same as the bar set for determining the ‘creamy layer’ for OBC. This effectively eliminates the distinction between the “EWS other than SC, ST, and OBC-NCL” and the OBC-NCL under the 103rd Amendment. This would result in unequal being treated equally.

The Supreme Court has regularly held that overall reservations should not exceed 50% in order to be reasonable and to not jeopardize the basic right to equality. This ’50 percent ceiling’ however, has been effectively violated by the most recent Constitutional change.

Certain structural concepts, such as democratic government, republican government, secularism federalism, judiciary independence, freedom, equality, judicial review power, and so on, form the core or essence of the Constitution and give it a distinct ‘Identity’. This is dictated by the idea of basic structure, and it cannot be changed since it would jeopardize the constitution’s uniqueness.

The Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. the State of Kerala that the Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 is not absolute and that even a constitutional amendment can be taken down if there are chances of it abrogating or destroying the Constitution’s “basic structure.” In September 1991, the then-P.V. Narasimha Rao government issued an Office Memorandum reserving ten percent of postings for ‘other economically deprived categories.’ The Supreme Court overturned this verdict in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India. The court in Indra Sawhney v. Union Of India and Ors. examined the constitutionality of the quotas in-depth, delving into the idea of backwardness. The reservation was made for a category of citizens who, according to Dr. BR Ambedkar, are those “groups which have not had so far representation in the State.” Indra Sawhney explains one of the reasons behind the 50 percent quota limit, stating that the Constitution allows for “appropriate representation” rather than “proportionate representation.”

The following are some of the key decisions made in the Indra Sawhney case regarding reservation:
• It supported the OBC reserve of 27%, with the exception of the “creamy layer.”
• It overturned the ten percent reservation for economically disadvantaged people, ruling that a backward category of citizens shall not be defined only on the basis of economic factors.
• It ruled that reservations for brought-forward or piled-up reserved vacancies should not exceed 50% of all appointments each year.
• It ruled that reservations can only be made in service or category if the State is satisfied that the representation of the backward class of citizens is insufficient.

In M. Nagaraj v. Union of India & Ors, the Hon’ble Court upheld the constitutional validity of Article 16 (4A) and the proviso to Article 335 and emphasized that the 50 percent ceiling, the concept of creamy layer, and compelling reasons such as overall administrative efficiency, backwardness, the inadequacy of representation, and are some of the constitutional requirements without which the point of equality for opportunities in Article 16 would be lost. Excessiveness in any form of reservation or evaluation, it has also been suggested, would result in a violation of this constitutional requirement. Because of this, the 50 percent reservation bar has been embedded into the fundamental structure of the Constitution’s code of equality.

The Supreme Court ruled in State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas that Article 16(1), as a component of the notion of equality, allows justifiable categorization of all citizens who are in a similar situation with respect to the law. In other words, even if Article 16(4) of the Indian constitution is not there, Article 16(1) enables reserves and special treatment. Article 16(4) is not be made an exception to Article 16(1); rather, it aims to express what is already inherent in Article 16. (1).

Indra Sawhney provides a midway ground between N.M. Thomas and M.R. Balaji, according to the Supreme Court’s decision. It found a compromise between substantive equality and nominal equality by retaining the ‘50% ceiling’ criterion.

104th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2020
This Act abolished Anglo-Indian reservations in the Lok Sabha and state legislatures while extending reserves for SCs and STs for up to ten years. On December 9, 2019, Minister of Law and Justice Ravi Shankar Prasad introduced this bill for amendment in the Lok Sabha. The bill intended to modify Article 334 of the Constitution. On December 10, 2019, the Lok Sabha passed the Bill with 355 votes in favor and there were 0 votes against it. On December 12, 2019, the bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha, where it gained 163 votes in favor and there were 0 votes against it. President Ram Nath Kovind of India gave his assent to the law on January 21, 2020, and it was published in the Indian Gazette the same day. On January 25, 2020, the amendment took effect.

Aside from the fact that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes have shown some significant progress for the last 70 years, the reasons that played a part in the Constituent Assembly’s decision to make provisions for the aforementioned reservation of seats still exist, according to Minister of Law and Justice Ravishankar Prasad. Due to this, an amendment to the Constitution was needed in order to keep the Constitution’s inclusive nature as intended by the founding fathers.

The Ministry of Law and Justice further stated that the issue of the extension of Anglo-Indian reservation in the Legislative Assembly had not yet been raised. However, he stated that the matter of terminating the reservation will be addressed by the center at a later date and that the subject matter has not been completely resolved.

The reservation seats for the Anglo Indians were not extended as it was for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which was one of the main criticisms of the amendment. The objective and reason for such an Amendment, provide justification for such enactment. The 104th Constitutional Amendment’s declaration of goal and reason explains the enlargement of the SC and ST reservations but it does not explain why the Anglo-Indian reservation seats were not extended or increased.

In Prashar v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas (1963), the Supreme Court decided that the statement of purposes and reasons for adopting a piece of law cannot be used to interpret the statute if the language used is plain enough. The declaration of objects and reasons, on the other hand, can be utilized to figure out what led to the law and what the problem was being solved through the legislation.

Parliamentarians have considered the interpretation of extending for SCs and STs with the goal of the founding authors of the Constitution. However, when it came to Anglo-Indians, the approach was not in the spirit of the founding fathers, but rather based on numerical data from the 2011 Census, rather than the report on the Anglo-Indian Community given by the 2013 Ministry of Minority Affairs. Anglo-Indians face challenges such as loss of culture, unemployment, identity crisis, educational backwardness, and a lack of acceptable housing amenities, according to a 2013 Ministry of Minority Affairs fact-finding report.

105th CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT, 2021
On August 9, 2021, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment introduced the 127th Amendment Bill of the Constitution, which was later approved as the 105th Constitution (Amendment) Act. both the Houses of the legislature passed the act unanimously without delay on subsequent days. The major goal of enacting this Act was to bring back the states’ ability to identify their own state’s backward classes.

SEBC and OBC
In India, the Centre creates a separate list that recognizes the Other Backward Classes (OBC). Similarly, each State determines which classes are classified as Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) of that state. Articles 15(4), 15(5), and 16 of the Indian Constitution have established these lists which are essential for the framework of reservation and quotas.

The Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act of 2018 was enacted to address the Central List of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs). Independent lists of the backward classes have been maintained by the Central Government and the State Governments since 1993. However, the Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act of 2018 raised the question of whether it mandated a single Central List of SEBCs detailing the SEBCs for each State, removing the State’s ability to establish and maintain its own State List of SEBCs. Furthermore, because authority has already been given to the Central government to issue lists, including Central in the then-amended Article 342A was redundant.

A contentious piece of legislation- which is The Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018, was considered unconstitutional until the Supreme Court pronounced it illegal in Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. Chief Minister (2021).

Several writ petitions challenging the constitutional legality of the reservation act have been filed in the Bombay High Court. The petitioner’s primary points of contention were as follows:

The Act is unlawful because it exceeds the 50% ceiling established on a reservation in any state according to the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India decision (1992).

The Act establishes reservations based on the Justice Gaikwad Commission’s findings, which purportedly lacks trustworthy, scientific, and appropriate facts to prove either Marathas’ backwardness or the extraordinary circumstances that justify raising reservations in Maharashtra.

The Act establishes reservations based on the Justice Gaikwad Commission’s findings, which purportedly lacks trustworthy, scientific, and appropriate facts to prove either Marathas’ backwardness or the extraordinary circumstances that justify raising reservations in Maharashtra.

The state government had passed the Act without complying with the 102nd Constitution (Amendment) Act’s procedural provisions.

The respondent- The Maharashtra State Government, argued that special circumstances, such as an increase in the incidence of suicides among Maratha families due to social and economic issues, justified the Act.

The Bombay High Court upheld the reservation for the Marathas but requested the state administration to cut it to 12-13 percent — the level proposed by the State Backward Class Commission, as opposed to the 16 percent given by the Act. The rationale was that, as the Maharashtrian government demonstrated, the Supreme Court-imposed ceiling on the total percentage of seats might be exceeded in extraordinary situations.

The Supreme Court accepted an appeal from the Bombay High Court’s verdict for the Maharashtra state government on July 12, 2019. The bench overturned the High Court verdict and declared the SEBC Act unconstitutional since there were no special circumstances that allowed for the violation of the 50% reservation mark. This was the unanimous decision of the Bench.

Meanwhile, the majority of the Bench, with two exceptions, believes that the 102nd Amendment deprives the state of the ability to identify backward classes. According to the ruling, only the President can issue a list that points out the economically disadvantaged, which Parliament can then change. In this regard, states merely have a recommending power. On this point, Justices Bhushan and Nazeer dissented, believing that Parliament did not have any intention to withdraw the States’ identification authority.

CONCLUSION

The Indian Constitution is a fusion of the United States’ basic law doctrine and the United Kingdom’s unwritten constitution’s theory of Parliamentary sovereignty. In other words, the Constitution is very stiff that Parliament, the supreme law-making body, cannot modify it. India picked a medium ground between the formality of the United States Constitution and the flexibility of the United Kingdom’s unwritten customs in order to allow the new nation to grow smoothly.

These Constitutional Amendments are significant because it reflects our society’s growing need for development and advancement, particularly among those who need it the most due to their backwardness. The fact that many communities require the presentation of the OBC category for reasons other than political power is linked to the belief that many of them have a lot of room for development in India. The severe caste system has yet to be dismantled, and this bleak reality requires further reflection and policy creativity. Another problem raised by this Amendment is how will the responsibilities be carried out by the states, as states will now be driven by local politics to include newer communities in their OBC lists.

As a result of the Constitution Amendment Bill, the standard operating procedures of the OBC, the scheduled castes, and tribes reserve have been clarified, ensuring empowerment and representation for communities that are frequently left out of inclusive development debate. Its goal is to empower people from underdeveloped communities by improving their social status via quality education and job opportunities, paving the road for inclusive development.

Written by Tingjin Marak, a student at Ajeenkya DY Patil University, Pune.