English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

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.

Application of horizontal reservation for women in India: the conundrum resolved by the supreme court