.png)
By Sania S Bafna & Kyra Mehra
I. Introduction
The implementation of the Women Reservation Bill, as recommended by the 1974 Committee, represents a significant step towards achieving gender equality in the Indian parliamentary system.[1] However, it took more than half a century for this legislation to come to fruition, prompting a reflective examination of its implications. While appreciating the progress made, it is essential to recognize that this is but a partial stride towards equity.
This article aims to argue the necessity of two critical and requisite additions to the bill without which it would be incomplete and grossly unfair. First, the exclusion of the ‘creamy layer’ to ensure that the benefits accrue solely to those truly deserving of them. Second, the introduction of reservations for the LGBTQIA+ community because only then will we take a complete step towards inclusivity and equality.
II. Addressing the ‘Creamy Layer’ barrier on reservations
The Women Reservation Bill is a long-debated piece of legislation, aimed at enhancing the representation of women in government bodies by reserving 33% seats in state legislative assemblies and the Lok Sabha.[2] It has been opposed and criticized by political parties like the Congress party, Samajwadi Party, Rashtriya Janata Dal and Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP) along with various state chief ministers.[3] They suggested that the bill benefits only the ‘creamy layer’ within the female population which sparked the discussion on the possibility of a ‘quota within quota’ system to ensure that a larger spectrum of women is positively impacted as the bill lacks clarity.[4] To analyse whether the opposition’s arguments hold merit, we must examine concepts like ‘creamy layer’, ‘merit’, and ‘quota within quota’ keeping in mind the ambit of the bill.
A. Background
The Bill pledges that one-third of the total number of seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be reserved for women belonging to these groups in the Lok Sabha and the legislative assemblies post-census.[5] However, the bill, since its ratification, has been criticised as it does not account for the representation of marginalised women.[6] As a result, it may further perpetuate inequality among women.[7] This argument does have some merit because the bill does not explicitly say what ‘class’ of women are being benefited, rather it leaves us hanging by using ‘women’ in its general sense. From this perspective, we may further question whether this policy will be an effective instrument to empower women from all strata of society. In other words, can it truly be deemed effective for marginalised women who require representation, or does it solely impact women within the upper echelons of society? If so, it may be perceived that women are not competing on merit anymore hence upholding pre-existing doubts on their competence hence defeating the true purpose of the bill.[8]
B. The ‘Creamy Layer’ concept
The ‘Creamy Layer’ was originally defined as those within backward classes who, despite being socioeconomically backward, had become socially, economically, and educationally advanced.[9] The court, in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and Others, said that the wealthy and advanced members formed the ‘creamy layer’ among backward classes.[10] The judgment directed the State governments to identify the ‘creamy layer’ and exclude them from the purview of reservations.[11] The court ruled that members of SC and ST communities who belong to socially, educationally, and economically advanced segments must not be eligible for government service reservation benefits. This is necessary to guarantee that the weakest members of the backward class do not steal the quota benefits from the weakest of the weaker individuals.[12] The court noted that weaker groups cannot advance if the wealthy and well-educated members of that class take all public sector jobs, leaving the truly underprivileged classes behind. In Jarnail Singh vs. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, Justice Nariman emphasized the importance of the creamy layer concept and said that unless applied, the reservation benefits would be inaccessible to those who genuinely need them. [13] The eminence of the ‘creamy layer’ in this analysis is that it soaks up all the benefits available in society when reservations should ensure not just the identification but guarantee that only the genuinely worthy and most oppressed members of any given community receive those reserve benefits.[14] The main essence of reservations is to uplift socially, educationally, and economically backward sections assuming that the general category was already ‘socially, educationally and economically advanced’.[15] However, the earlier regarded ‘socially backward’ is now economically well-to-do and can successfully compete with the ‘general’ category. They may unfairly reap the benefits of reservations.
C. The ‘quota within quota’ angle
"Sub-quotas" or "quotas within quotas" refer to the practice of assigning reserved seats within a larger category—such as reservations—to particular subgroups to guarantee that the policy is applied to only those who are truly deserving members of the larger category.[16] In the context of the Bill, other than women from the ‘general’ category, women from oppressed classes OBC, and Adivasi women or other marginalized genders require such reservation.
This system was recommended by the Supreme Court in Pattali Makkal Katchi vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.[17] The court had revisited and acknowledged the existence of a ‘creamy layer’ for the privileged few within lower castes like SCs, STs, OBCs, etc. who have enjoyed reservation benefits more than the lesser privileged within their caste. The bench permitted sub-reservations to safeguard the marginalised groups within such classes to further ensure an equitable distribution of benefits.[18] Such a system for the Women Reservation Bill has remained a proposition since 1996. A Joint Parliamentary Committee chaired by Geeta Mukherjee had studied the 1996 proposal and made a recommendation, regarding a sub-quota of OBC women after the Constitution provided for OBC reservation.[19]
The ‘quota within quota’ debate further substantiates the idea of the exclusion of the creamy layer. The bill should aim to serve and aid women who are marginalized within the broader category of women instead of the entire category of women. Sub-quotas separate the creamy layer from the marginalized within the category of women. They will prevent the bill from being a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach as it will acknowledge and address the unique challenges faced by the marginalized sub-groups of women.
D. Analysing the Complexities and Recommendations
The initial goal of the reservation system was to encourage ‘positive segregation’ and to uplift all those considered socially and economically backward. It was to ensure that the ‘creamy layer’ cannot encroach upon every opportunity present, leaving those with limited individual means, stranded. The main purpose of the reservation was for underrepresented groups in the political system.[20]
However, the present Women Reservation bill is said to be an ‘elite class conspiracy’. Questioning the fundamentals of the bill is not intended to alienate upper-caste women but to show concern for lower-caste women. If deserving beneficiaries are excluded from affirmative action for gender equality then the purpose of the bill must be reassessed. It is not to say that women of the elite classes have not faced discrimination but explicit mentioning within legislation gives primacy to a minority group in the eyes of the law and society. It is also not to say that the creamy layer families within OBC must be given benefits. They too are parallel to the upper caste as they can misuse their caste status to avail reservations in jobs and educational institutions.[21] To combat the aforementioned, the Act should exclude all women from ‘creamy layer’ families irrespective of whether they are from general or reservation categories. Such women must contest elections from non-reserved seats. Otherwise, the true proponents of the bill, Dalit-Bahujan-Adivasi Women are being denied, in a way, a universal adult franchise.[22] By reserving seats only for women, a woman can be chosen over another woman because a backward OBC woman’s interests will be ignored, a privileged general or OBC woman’s interests will be furthered, by extension, abandoning the non-homogeneity of women as a group and serve as a cover for privilege hence, running counter to the constitutional principle of equality.[23] The competition will be based on politics and policies, and not as a gender fight, breaking the main bedrock of this policy suggestion.
The proposition that the world should operate on ‘merit’ is an idyllic notion because inequality is multi-layered. Intersectionality is where disadvantages based on caste, class, culture, and gender meet at a crossroads. The primary point raised by critics revolves around the ‘intersectionality’ of caste, gender, and even religion, deeply entrenched within the bill and society at large, a double whammy disadvantage to truly deprived women. While provisions regarding sub-quotas for Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes are included in the WRB, concerns for a sub-quota for women from Other Backward Classes (OBC) and Muslim communities were raised. Arguing that women are not a homogenous category; they are divided through caste and class. A homogenous reservation will benefit elite Hindu women only, therefore, the opposition to vertical reservation for OBC and Muslim women. Even the supporters of the Women Reservation Bill should identify women in a ‘horizontal’ manner, cutting across the other ‘vertical’ segregation such as caste, class, and religion.[24]
All in all, there should be a quota for OBC and minority women within the bill. Two options for improving the representation of women were assessed by the Standing Committee. First, it was suggested that political parties designate a minimum number of seats for women. The second proposal called for the establishment of dual-member constituencies, each of which would have one seat held by a woman. The Committee believed that it could “result in women being reduced to a subservient status, which will defeat the very purpose of the Bill”.[25] The political parties themselves take a voluntary, or mandatory, quota of women as candidates at each election. In this way, more women will receive political party backing, helping them both financially and increasing their visibility as candidates. This is the idea behind the ‘Alternative Bill’, which would require parties to nominate 33% of its candidates as women by amending the Representation of the People Act 1951.[26]
In conclusion, reservation benefits for OBC students and youth from creamy-layer families must be denied, and women from creamy-layer families must not be eligible for the new Act. Let only the non-reserved seats be used by women from the elite class to contest elections, regardless of their caste.[27] The inclusion of a quota within a quota is essential if the Bill is to empower women. In 2010, we expressed concern about women’s empowerment across all sections, and that concern still stands today. There is no doubt that the Bill needs to be reviewed because it lacks nuanced clarity.
III. Expanding the reservations to LGBTQIA+ community
Women’s representation in the current parliament stands at 14.36%, a figure that only becomes glaringly insufficient when considered in the context of more than 75 years of independence.[28] This raises a critical question: will the nation need another century to acknowledge the gross underrepresentation of the LGBTQIA+ community, which currently holds zero parliamentary seats?
A. Underrepresentation of Women
The 2021 LGBT+ PRIDE Global Survey reveals that merely 2% of the Indian population identifies beyond the traditional male-female binary.[29] Many LGBTQIA+ individuals hesitate to embrace their true identities due to the fear of societal exclusion, ignorance, or prejudice. The proposition of introducing reservations for this marginalised community carries the potential to address both of these concerns. By granting them political representation, individuals from the LGBTQIA+ spectrum can find powerful advocates who will empower them to embrace their identities and dismantle the stigma surrounding non-binary and non-conforming gender expressions. Queer representation helps ensure that the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals are upheld and protected. These representatives can advocate for anti-discrimination laws, marriage equality, and other policies that promote equal treatment under the law. Having openly queer politicians will challenge stereotypes and biases about the LGBTQIA+ community. It helps normalise diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, reducing prejudice and promoting acceptance.
The significance of reservations in addressing historical injustices and inequalities is undebatable. These policies aim to redress long-standing disparities that have plagued marginalised communities for centuries, perpetuated through discrimination and systemic oppression. By facilitating diversity and inclusion, reservations contribute to a more vibrant and representative society. When individuals from diverse backgrounds have a place at the decision-making table, it fosters a more holistic, equitable, and socially responsive policymaking process.
Furthermore, reservations can catalyse economic development. Historically marginalised groups once granted opportunities to participate in the economic sphere, can contribute to poverty reduction and overall economic growth. This economic empowerment reinforces the multifaceted benefits of reservations and underscores their potential to transform societies into fairer, more harmonious entities.
B. Historical Injustice & the Constitution
Reservations in India have a historical legacy dating back to 1902 when Shahu, the Maharaja of the princely state of Kolhapur, introduced reservations in favour of non-Brahmin and backward classes in education.[30] These reservations were aimed at rectifying historical injustices and social hierarchies, providing marginalised communities with a pathway to equitable participation in various sectors. This tradition continued into the post-independence era when the Indian Constitution included provisions mandating representation for specific communities to address historical disparities.
While the Indian Constitution explicitly endorses the concept of reservations, it raises pertinent questions regarding the selection of beneficiaries and the allocation of reserved seats. It is crucial to determine which communities merit reservations and at what percentage. The primary objective of reservations is to uplift communities that have been historically oppressed and discriminated against. It is a means of rectifying the systemic injustices that have perpetuated inequality.
In this context, the LGBTQIA+ community merits inclusion within the purview of reservations due to their prolonged exclusion and marginalization and deserves at least 5% representation and political standing. The baseline of 5% will also ensure that the overall reservation mark does not cross 50% as mandated by the Constitution and is proportionate to the current representation of LGBTQIA+ citizens.[31] This percentage would also encourage people who otherwise are reluctant, to embrace their identity.
Until about two decades ago, the LGBTQIA+ community remained unrecognized by the legislature, with Article 377 blatantly criminalising homosexuality based on its gendered provisions.[32] The 2014 Supreme Court’s judgment overruled the Delhi High Court judgement in Naz Foundation vs. Government of NCT of Delhi by holding that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code does not suffer from any constitutional infirmity and in effect criminalized homosexuality once again. [33] Despite Navtej Johar v. UOI reading down Section 377 in 2018 it is evident that the judiciary alone cannot be trusted to reverse years of disparity and inequality.[34] The other arms of the law will have to intervene and that starts from the legislature being more inclusive. They can push for inclusive policies and legislation that benefit not only the LGBTQIA+ community but society as a whole. This includes healthcare access, comprehensive sex education, and mental health support.
The legal framework surrounding reservations in India is governed by the Constitution, and it embodies the principles of equality before the law and equal protection of laws. Article 14 of the Indian Constitution enshrines the concept of equality before the law, which is characterized as negative. It prohibits the granting of special privileges to any individual or group. In contrast, the concept of equal protection of laws, articulated within Article 14, mandates that individuals at similar levels should be treated equally. Aristotle’s aphorism, “equals should be treated equally, and unequals unequally,” encapsulates this idea, commonly referred to as positive discrimination.[35] Reservations are a form of positive discrimination, acknowledging that marginalised communities need additional support to achieve true equality.
C. Redefining Meritocracy
One common criticism of reservations is that they may deprive meritorious individuals of opportunities, perpetuating the notion that meritocracy is undermined by such affirmative actions.[36] However, it is essential to understand that meritocracy, as analysed earlier, is a myth. Numerous factors such as socioeconomic background, access to resources, and systemic biases influence an individual’s success. A progressive nation should strive to ensure that every citizen has an equal voice and is provided with equitable opportunities, irrespective of their background or identity.
Reservations in India are rooted in a historical legacy of addressing social and economic inequalities.[37] They are meant to provide historically marginalised communities with a fair chance to participate in various sectors. The LGBTQIA+ community’s inclusion within the ambit of reservations is justified, given their long history of discrimination and exclusion. The legal framework within the Indian Constitution endorses these principles of equality and positive discrimination. Reservations are not about undermining meritocracy but about creating a more inclusive society where every citizen, regardless of their background or identity, can thrive and contribute to the nation’s progress. The question is not whether reservations should exist, but rather whom they should serve and how they can be implemented effectively to achieve a just and equitable society.
Globally, only five countries worldwide have granted equal constitutional rights to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, with most of these nations failing to safeguard the community against pervasive discrimination and mistreatment.[38] A thesis on LGBTQIA+ involvement in politics captured the effect of this transition: The question shifted from whether homosexuality exists legitimately to whether it is appropriate to participate in it.[39] Although this might be a small change in the war of eradicating discrimination it still is a movement in the right direction. Having queer representation in politics can set an example for countries around the world, encouraging them to pursue more inclusive policies and protect the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals. India can be a global leader by including affirmative actions in politics and setting standards for the countries to follow through.
Queer representation in politics is about ensuring that LGBTQIA+ individuals have a voice in the decision-making processes that affect their lives. It’s not just about LGBTQIA+ rights; it’s about advancing human rights, fostering inclusivity, and creating a society where everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, can thrive and live free from discrimination.
IV. Conclusion
Considering the arguments presented in this discourse, it becomes evident that while the Women Reservation Bill represents a significant milestone in the pursuit of gender equality within the Indian political landscape, it remains an incomplete and underdeveloped endeavour. The historical context underscores that India has long been overdue in initiating reforms of this nature, making the imperativeness of this approach even more apparent in light of the delays that have marred the implementation of the bill.
The inclusion of a creamy layer sub-provision within the Women Reservation Bill is a proposition that warrants attention and consideration. The purpose of such a provision would be to prevent elite or already privileged sections within the women’s community from monopolizing the reserved seats. By incorporating a creamy layer provision, the bill can ensure that its benefits reach those women who have historically faced social and economic disadvantages. This adjustment would be in alignment with the bill’s primary objective of addressing gender inequality, ensuring that it reaches the most marginalised women who genuinely require support.
Furthermore, the imperative for affirmative action for the LGBTQIA+ community cannot be overstated. As the discourse highlights, the queer community has endured decades of societal exclusion and discrimination, with a legal framework that, until recently, criminalised their identities and relationships. The absence of provisions to address the historic injustices faced by the LGBTQIA+ community not only undermines the bill’s commitment to equity but also perpetuates the marginalization of a significant portion of the population. Hence, the authors argue that the bill’s scope should be broadened to incorporate affirmative action for the LGBTQIA+ community, thereby addressing their historical grievances and fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.
Failure to take these crucial steps towards comprehensiveness carries significant repercussions for the future. The bill’s present state, with its inherent limitations and loopholes, risks undermining the fundamental principles of equal representation and justice. It may inadvertently perpetuate the dominance of certain privileged groups while failing to provide an adequate platform for those who have been historically marginalized. Consequently, the very ideals that the bill seeks to uphold may remain unfulfilled, casting a long shadow of inequality over the nation’s political landscape.
References
[1] Astha Rajvanshi, ‘Why India’s Women’s Reservation Bill is a Major Step Forward’ (Time Magazine, 21 September 2023) <https://time.com/6316383/india-womens-reservation-bill/> accessed 10 November 2023.
[2] ‘India passes law to reserve seats for women legislators’ (UNWomen.org, 4 October 2023) <https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/feature-story/2023/10/india-passes-law-to-reserve-seats-for-women-legislators > accessed 10 November 2023.
[3] Deeksha Bharwaj, ‘Women’s Reservation Bill: Parties raise concerns, demand ‘quota within quota’’ (Hindustan Times, 19 September 2023), <https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/womens-reservation-bill-parties-raise-concerns-demand-quota-within-quota-101695132428404.html> accessed 28 February 2024.
[4] ibid; see also ‘From ‘revolutionary step’ to ‘election jumla’: How political parties reacted to women’s reservation bill’ (Times of India, 19 September 2023) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/from-revolutionary-step-to-election-jumla-how-political-parties-reacted-to-womens-reservation-bill/articleshow/103785176.cms> accessed 28 February 2024.
[5] Women Reservation Bill 2023 [The Constitution (One Hundred Twenty-Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2023 <https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-constitution-one-hundred-twenty-eighth-amendment-bill-2023> accessed 4 October 2023.
[6] Deeksha Bhardwaj, ‘Women Reservation Bill: Parties raise concerns, demand ‘quota within quota’ (Hindustan Times, 19 September 2023) <https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/womens-reservation-bill-parties-raise-concerns-demand-quota-within-quota-101695132428404.html > accessed 18 October 2023.
[7] Women Reservation Bill 2023 [The Constitution (One Hundred Twenty-Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2023 <https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-constitution-one-hundred-twenty-eighth-amendment-bill-2023> accessed 4th October 2023.
[8] Dr Jayaprakash Narayan, Dhirubhai Sheth, Yogendra Yadav, Madhu Kishwar, Manushi, ‘Enhancing Women’s Representation in Legislatures: An Alternative to the Government Bill for Women’s Representation’ (Foundation for Democratic Reforms) <https://ekcenter.fdrindia.org/sites/default/files/AdvocacyPapers/Enhancing%20Women%27s%20Representation%20in%20Legislatures%20-%20to%20update.pdf> accessed 18th October 2023.
[9] Shreya Mishrat and Vipin Sharmatt, ‘Reservation to the Economically Backward Class – Indian Constitution Perspective’ (SCCOnline,16 June, 2019) <https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2019/06/16/reservation-to-the-economically-backward-class-indian-constitutional-perspective/> accessed 23 August 2023.
[10] Indra Sawhney v Union Of India And Others AIR 1993 SC 477 [629],[635].
[11] Krishnadas Rajagopal, ‘Explained: What has the Supreme Court ruled on ‘creamy layer’?’ (TheHindu, 22 November 2021) <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/explained-what-has-the-supreme-court-ruled-on-creamy-layer/article61424803.ece> accessed 16 October 2023.
[12] Mitakshara Kapoor, ‘Explained: Creamy Layer Concept’ (LiveLaw, 17 August 2022) <https://www.livelaw.in/lawschoolcolumn/reservation-obc-85th-constitutional-amendment-act-of-2001-socially-and-educationally-backward-classes-206776> accessed 17 October 2023.
[13] Jarnail Singh vs. Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018) 10 SCC 396 [10-12],[25],[26].
[14] Shalin Maria Lawrence, ‘Reserve For Deserved: Quota Within Quota a Dire Need in Women Reservation Bill’ (The Quint, 27 September 2023) <https://www.thequint.com/opinion/women-reservation-bill-quota-within-quota-dalit-bahujan-intersex-trans-persons> accessed 17 October 2023.
[15] Indra Sawhney v Union of India And Others AIR 1993 SC 477 [578],[591],[593].
[16] Apurva Vishwanath, ‘Explained: The ‘quota within quota’ debate’ (The Indian Express, 1 September 2020) <https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/supreme-court-sc-st-reservation-quota-6572693/> accessed 25th Jan 2024.
[17] Pattali Makkal Katchi vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 386 [803].
[18] Ibid.
[19] Soni Mishra,’Women Reservation Bill: Understanding the opposition’s ‘quota within quota’ demand’(The Week, 20 September 2023) <https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2023/09/20/womens-reservation-bill-understanding-the-oppositions-quota-within-quota-demand.html> accessed17 October 2023.
[20] Reservation of Seats for Women in Legislative Bodies: Perspectives, (Rajya Sabha Secretariat, July 2008) http://164.100.213.102/RSCMSNew/UploadedFiles/ElectronicPublications/reserv_women_pers2008.pdf accessed17 October 2023.
[21] Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao v. State of A.P., (2021) 11 SCC 401 [834]
[22] Shalin Maria Lawrence, ‘Reserve For Deserved: Quota Within Quota a Dire Need in Women Reservation Bill’ (The Quint, 27 September 2023) <https://www.thequint.com/opinion/women-reservation-bill-quota-within-quota-dalit-bahujan-intersex-trans-persons> accessed 17 October 2023.
[23] Menon, Nivedita. ‘Elusive ‘Woman’: Feminism and Women Reservation Bill’ (2000), Economic and Political Weekly < http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409891> accessed 17 October 2023.
[24] Bharti Sehta, ‘Women Reservation Bill: The Politics of ‘Power Sharing’ in India’ (2015) The Indian Journal of Political Science, < https://www.jstor.org/stable/26534793 > accessed 17 October 2023.
[25] MR Madhavan, ‘Update on the Women Reservation Bill’ (PRS India Blog, 9 February 2010) <https://prsindia.org/theprsblog/update-on-the-women%E2%80%99s-reservation-bill?page=40&per-page=1> accessed 18 October 2023.
[26] Bharti Sehta, ‘Women Reservation Bill: The Politics of ‘Power Sharing’ in India’ (2015) The Indian Journal of Political Science, < https://www.jstor.org/stable/26534793 >.
[27] ‘Women`s Reservation Bill’ (Frontline, 23 April, 2010) <https://frontline.thehindu.com/other/article30180086.ece> accessed 17 October 2023.
[28] A look at women representation in parliaments of 10 democracies’ (Indian Express, 19 September, 2023) <https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/everyday-explainers/women-representation-parliament-democracies-8946800 > accessed 17th October 2023.
[29] ‘LGBT+Pride 2021 Global Survey points to a generation gap around gender identity and sexual attraction’ (IPSOS, 9th June 2021), <https://www.ipsos.com/en/lgbt-pride-2021-global-survey-points-generation-gap-around-gender-identity-and-sexual-attraction> accessed 5th March 2024.
[30] ‘History of Reservation in India’ (GOI Monitor Desk, 11 January 2019) <https://www.goimonitor.com/story/history-reservation-india> accessed 5th March 2024.
[31] ‘Explainer: The 1993 SC Judgment Capping Quotas at 50%, Disallowing Them for the Poor’ (The Wire, 12th January 2019) <https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-indra-sawhney-reservation> accessed 6th March 2024
[32] The discussion on this fall outside the realm of this paper, however the point trying to be conveyed is that the law has been discriminatory.
[33] Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr v Naz Foundation (2014) 1 SCC 1; Naz Foundation v Govt (NCT of Delhi), 2009 SCC OnLine Del 1762 : 2010 Cri LJ 94
[34] Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) 1 SCC 791
[35] ‘Chapter 6: Should AI be fair and non-discriminative’ (Ethics of AI) <https://ethics-of-ai.mooc.fi/chapter-6/2-the-varieties-of-fairness> accessed 6th March 2024.
[36] Rao, J. Laxminarasima, ‘Reservation Policy and The Principle Of Merit: A Study Of Indian Bureaucracy’ (1992) The Indian Journal of Political Science 53, no. 4. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/41855630> accessed 6th March 2024.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Lin Taylor, ‘Only five countries give LGBT people equal constitutional rights: research’ (Thomas Reuters. 29 June 2016) <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-lgbt-rights-idUSKCN0ZF1IC > accessed 6th March 2024.
[39] Brett V. Ries, ‘The Relationship Between LGBTQ+ Representation on the Political and Theatrical Stages’ (University of South Dakota, 2020). <https://red.library.usd.edu/honors-thesis/75 > accessed 10th November, 2023.
Sania S Bafna is a second-year law student at Jindal Global Law School. She is an internationally published author of the novel 'It's My Turn Now' and likes to explore different fields and widen her horizon.
Kyra Mehra is a second-year law student at Jindal Global Law School. She is a passionate researcher & writer with an interest in legal history, administrative law and constitutional law and theory.
Comments