Sign in / Join   

HOME BLOG ACTS CAREERS LAW NOTES  WEEKLY COMPETITION  

Home  Constitutional law  Doctrine of reasonable classification

Constitutional law Doctrine General India internship

Doctrine of reasonable classification

November 28, 2023  36013  0

   

This article has been written by Diva Rai and updated by

Upasana Sarkar. This article deals with the doctrine of
reasonable classification, which provides a detailed
understanding of its concept, scope, and significance in India.

It has been published by Rachit Garg.

Table of Contents

0.1. Introduction
0.2. Article 14 Equality before Law
0.3. Origin of Equality before Law
0.4. Equal Protection of Law
0.5. Rule of Law
0.6. Meaning of the Rule of Law
0.7. Rule of Law In India
0.7.1. Supremacy of Law:
0.7.2. Equality before Law:
0.7.3. Individual Liberty:
0.8. Exception To Rule of Law
0.9. Reasonable Classification
0.10. Scope of doctrine of reasonable classification
0.10.1. Intelligible Differentia
0.11. Importance of doctrine of reasonable classification
0.12. Test of Reasonable Classification
0.13. Role played by the doctrine of reasonable classification in
Administrative Law
0.14. Article 14 Permits Classification But Prohibits Class
Legislation
0.15. Meaning and Scope of the Right to Equality
0.16. Limitations of the doctrine of reasonable classification
0.17. Judicial pronouncements
0.18. Conclusion
0.19. Frequently asked questions (FAQs)
0.19.1. Which amendment introduced an exception to Article 14?
0.19.2. What is the difference between class legislation and
reasonable classification?
0.19.3. Which States inspired India to introduce this doctrine of
reasonable classification?
0.20. References

Introduction
Article 14 in India’s Constitution guarantees the right to
equality for every citizen of the country. It encompasses the
general principles of equality before the law and prohibits
unreasonable discrimination between two persons. It
incorporates the idea of equality expressed in the preamble.

Article 14 Equality before Law

It is declared in the article that ‘the State shall not deny to any
person equality before the law or equal protection of law within
the territory of India.’ The expressions of equal protection of
law and equality before the law are enshrined in the
constitution. They guarantee the fundamental rights and aim to
establish equality of status. The two expressions seem
identical, but they do not convey similar meanings.

Origin of Equality before Law

The term has its origin from America and is somewhat a
negative concept aiming at the implication of an absence of
some special privileges. This can be by the reason of birth,
religion, sex, caste, etc and by the ordinary law in favor of
persons and all the equal subject of classes.

Equal Protection of Law

The term has its origin from Britain and is somewhat a positive
concept aiming at equal treatment in identical situations. In
other words, the President or the Prime Minister of the country
should be dealt in the same manner in law as that of a common
citizen.

To know more about reasonable classification and its validity

under Article 14 in brief, please refer to the video below:

Rule of Law
The Rule of Law in England called by Dicey is an aspect of the
guarantee of equality before the law. This means that
irrespective of the rank of a person, his condition would be
subject to the jurisdiction of ordinary courts as no man is above
law. It is a requirement of the rule of law that no man should
be subjected to uncivilized, discriminatory and harsh
treatment. This would be applicable even when the objective is
to secure a paramount need of law and order.

Meaning of the Rule of Law

The three meanings as given by Professor Dicey of the Rule Of
Law are:

(i)- Supremacy of the law or the absence of arbitrary power:

This means that absolute supremacy of law prevails are

contrary to the Government’s arbitrary power.

A man can only be punished due to a breach of law and

nothing else.

(ii)- Equality before law:

This means that ordinary law courts administer the

subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land.

In the eyes of law, all are equal and no one is above law.

(iii)- Absence of individual liberty:

A variety of constitution grants individual freedom but does

not provide a method.

The source of individuals’ rights in the constitution is neither

written nor mentioned.

Provision for individual liberty is not in the U.K.

Rule of Law In India

Supremacy of Law:
The very first meaning is that in goods no person is punishable
or can be legally made to suffer. This is except for a distinct
infringement of law established in an ordinary legal manner
before the land’s ordinary courts. It means a person can be
punished for an infringement of the law but can not be held
responsible and punished for anything else. Except in the case
of a breach of law, a person cannot be punished. In accordance
with the ordinary procedure, an alleged offense needs to be
proven in front of the court.

Equality before Law:

A person irrespective of his rank or condition would be subject
to the realm of the ordinary law. He would be amenable at the
jurisdiction of ordinary tribunals. Under Article 14, every person
has equal protection and is equal before law.

Individual Liberty:
Article 21 provides protection of life and personal liberty while
Article 19 provides right to freedom which mentions individual
liberty like a fundamental right. The first and second of the
Dicey’s rule apply to the Indian system but not the third aspect
of it. This is because the Constitution of India is the source of
the right of individuals. Constitution is the supreme law of the
land. The laws passed by the legislature must be in consistency
to the provisions of the Constitution. A duty is imposed by the
rule of law upon the state as a special measure so as to
prevent and punish the brutality of the police methodology. A
basic feature is the embodiment of the rule of law in Article 14
of the Indian constitution. Under Article 368 also, it cannot be
destroyed or amended.

Exception To Rule of Law

The above mentioned rule of equality is not an absolute rule
and contains a lot many exceptions to it and they are:

The meaning of equality of law is not that the power lying at

the hands of the private citizens is the same as that of the
public officials. The rule of law requires that the powers of
the public officials must be clearly defined. The abuse of
such power or authority by the officials must be punishable
in the courts. Example- No private person can arrest another
person whereas a police officer has the power to do so. This
is not a violation of the rule of law.

A certain class of people being subject to some special rules

are not prevented by the rule of law. Example- Armed forces
members are controlled by their military rules; the medical
council of India controls the medical practitioners.

Special rules in the professions govern those specific

members of society. These people are treated differently
from other citizens. Example- Doctors, police, lawyers,
nurses, members of the armed forces, etc.

Reasonable Classification

If the classification is made on a reasonable basis, the

legislature can deal with two sets of individuals. A reasonable
classification must be based on smart differences. This means
that collectively grouped persons or things make a properly
defined, distinct class and may be exceptional from those left
out of the group. Furthermore, this classification basis must
have a rational nexus to the object that the legislation in
question seeks to achieve.

Illustration- The law on maternity benefits applies to women

working on the way to maternity, not to others. Because the
purpose of the law on maternity benefits is to grant privileges
only to women who turn out to be mothers when they need
them. Hence, the category of men and women is based totally
on an intelligible differentia.

Another illustration is of tax laws. Charities, libraries are

exempted from sure tax whereas other residences are not.

Scope of doctrine of reasonable

classification
The ambit of the doctrine of reasonable classification is derived
from the Constitution of India. The discrimination must be
made on the basis of valid reasons. A framework for
establishing reasonable classification among different
individuals or groups of society is provided under Article 14 of
the Constitution. The scope of a reasonable classification is
usually determined by its capacity in supporting some specific
regulations or legislation that are particularly addressed to
certain situations or conditions. This provides the concept that
all individuals are different from one another. So if the
treatments provided to them are equal or similar, it would lead
to unfairness and injustice. Therefore, when the State gives
special treatment to a particular section of people, it is done to
promote social welfare and justice. Hence, this doctrine of
classification offers the legislature an opportunity to enact laws
on the basis of intelligible differentia. It helps the State make
laws for the welfare of different sections of society and provide
equitable treatment to everyone.

Intelligible Differentia
The intelligible differentia is an important factor in reasonable
classification. It means forming a particular group of individuals
with common characteristics. In other words, the members of
that group should be unique from the members of other
groups. In addition to it, this classification ought to have a
reasonable connection that would explain the basis for its
enactment, which the country wants to find. For instance, the
Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, is
applicable to children who are below the age of 14 years to
protect them from being employed in hazardous industries. It
cannot be used for any children who have completed the age of
14 years. Similarly, the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, is available
only to the working women who are pregnant. It will not be
applicable to any other women except those who are expecting
a child. Maternity leave is important for those women who are
about to become mothers for their and their babies good
health. Women who carry a baby need special care and rest.
For this reason, Article 14 grants a reasonable classification
between men and women.

Importance of doctrine of
reasonable classification
As mentioned earlier, Article 14 guarantees everyone equality
before the law without any kind of unreasonable discrimination.
This means that necessary discrimination is allowed by law.
Since the situations and conditions of all individuals are
different, the way of treating them must also be different.
Therefore, reasonable discrimination is permitted. If the ground
of discrimination is fair, logical, and reasonable, then such
discrimination is considered necessary for the welfare of the
people of society. The doctrine of classification allows the
legislature to make laws accordingly. The legislature makes
laws keeping in mind the social inequalities and various other
challenges that people of different communities face. The laws
are made in such a way that no group or community feels
discriminated. It tries to provide equal opportunities to all
members of society. The Judiciary also plays an important role
in ensuring that the laws made by the legislature for the
benefit of any particular group or community are reasonable
and not arbitrary in nature.

Test of Reasonable Classification

Article 13 of the Indian constitution forbids class legislation but
it does not prohibit the reasonable classification of objects,
persons, and transactions for the purpose so as to achieve
specific ends by the parliament. Such classification should not
be artificial, arbitrary or evasive and it must rest on substantial
distinction which is real. It must bear a reasonable and just
relation to the sought object which is to be achieved by the
legislation. Classification of reasonable as laid by the Indian
Supreme Court has two conditions as in the case of Saurabh
Chaudhari v Union Of India [1], are-

(i)- The classification must be founded on intelligible

differentia, distinguishing grouped together persons or goods
from the left out ones of the group.

(ii)- The differential must be in a rational relation with the

sought object that is to be achieved by the act. The object of
the act and differential on the basis of classification are two
separate things. It is essential that there must be the presence
of nexus between the object of the act and the basis of
classification. When a reasonable basis is not present for
classification then such classification made by the legislature
must be declared discriminatory.

The age at which a person would be deemed competent

between themselves can be fixed by the legislature but
competency cannot be claimed. A contract made dependent on
the color of hair cannot be made, and such a classification
would be arbitrary.

Role played by the doctrine of

reasonable classification in
Administrative Law
This doctrine of reasonable classification also plays an
important role in the administrative laws in the following ways:

Provide guidance for the interpretation of statutes: It

also plays an important role by guiding the formation
statutes so that its interpretation does not give rise to any
irrational or ludicrous conclusion. So the legislators and the
judges use this doctrine as their guiding principle for
enacting or interpreting laws. It helps them deliver fair
justice to the people without any arbitrariness.

Testing the legitimacy of the law: One of the significant

roles played by the doctrine of reasonable classification is
determining the legitimacy of any bill of law that is
introduced or enacted by the Government of the State. The
rationality of that bill or law is determined by this doctrine.
It clarifies whether the law is justifiable or not, which in turn
reduces problems and increases acceptability.

Provide a standard for judicial review: This doctrine is

also useful in providing a standard for judicial review. The
judicial review nullifies any administrative action that seems
irrational or arbitrary. Some discretionary powers have been
granted to the administration, but those are also subjected
to judicial review.

Article 14 Permits Classification But

Prohibits Class Legislation
Article 14 guarantee equal protection of laws and they are:

Neither means that the laws need to be general in character

nor that it should be applicable to everyone, which means,
the same law applies to every person.

It does not assess attainment or situations in the same

position. Different classes have various needs that require
separate treatment.

For safety and security different laws for varying places and
legitimate control policies enacting laws lie at the best
interest of the state.

Identical treatment in unequal situations, in fact, would

amount as inequality.

Therefore for the society to progress a reasonable classification

is not only permitted but also necessary. Article 14 forbids class
legislation but not reasonable classification. The article applies
on the reasonable basis, equals are treated differently. The
article does not apply where unequals and equals are given
different treatments.

Conferring particular privileges upon a class of persons, class

legislation makes improper discrimination by selecting a large
number of persons arbitrarily. No reasonable or substantial
difference can be found in justifying the exclusion of the one
and the inclusion of the other from such privilege.

Meaning and Scope of the Right to

Equality
The propositions laid in Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Tendolkar [2],
explains the true scope and meaning to the right to equality
and holds a valid classification. It is as follows:

1- Even though relating to an individual person, a law would be

constitutional if on account of some reasons or special
circumstances is applicable to him and not applicable to others.
The individual person can be treated as a class.

2- There is a dependable assumption in favor of the

constitutionality of a rule and the burden is upon him who
attacks it to demonstrate that there has been a reasonable
transgression of established constitutional standards.

3- The assumption might be disproved in specific cases by

showing that on the fact of the statue, there is no order and no
distinction peculiar to any individual or class and not applicable
to any other individual or class, and yet the law hits a specific
individual or class.

4- It must be assumed that the legislature accurately

acknowledges and comprehends the need of its own people
that its law is directed to the problem made manifest by
involvement and that its discrimination is based on satisfactory
grounds.

5- So as to continue the assumption of constitutionality the

court may take into consideration matters of basic knowledge,
matters of report, the historical backdrop of the times and may
expect each condition of facts which can be conceived existing
at the time of the enactment.

6- Thus the legislation is allowed to perceive degrees of harm

and may confine its limitation to those situations where the
need is considered to be the clearest.

7- While good faith and knowledge of the current conditions

with respect to a legislature are to be assumed, if there is
nothing on the substance of the law or the surrounding
conditions brought to the notice of the court on which the
classification may reasonably be viewed as based, the
assumption of constitutionality can’t be conveyed to the degree
dependably that there must be some undisclosed and obscure
explanation behind exposing certain people or organization to
be unfriendly or discriminating legislation.

8- The classification can be made on various bases like

geographical or according to object or occupation.

9- The legislative classification no longer needs to be

scientifically perfect or logically complete. There is no need for
mathematical nicety and perfect equality. Equal treatment no
longer involves the same treatment. Similarly, remedy identity
is no longer enough.

10- There may be discrimination each inside the substantive as

well as the procedural law. Article 14 applies to both. If the
class satisfies the test laid down inside the above propositions,
the regulation could be declared constitutional. The query
whether or not a classification is reasonable and proper and no
longer need to but, be judged more on common sense than on
legal subtitles.

Limitations of the doctrine of

reasonable classification
The doctrine of reasonable classification has some limitations
as well. The critics pointed out the few situations where this
doctrine can be misused by the people. This reasonable
discrimination can lead to unjustified differentiation at times.
So it is required to ensure that while making a reasonable
classification, it should not be done in any arbitrary way. It is
necessary to make sure that the law is fair and reasonable. It
should be made in such a way that no fundamental rights of
any person are infringed. The classification must be made in
such a way that it removes inequality among various sections
of society. This reasonableness of classification is scrutinized by
the Judiciary. The judicial review examines whether the
classification made in a particular case is reasonable or not.
This would help safeguard the principles of the Indian
Constitution.

Another important limitation is that it may be subjective to

determine the factors that would constitute a reasonable
classification. Providing equal or the same treatment to
everyone might not always be right due to factors like age,
gender, physical strength, and many more. If everyone had
been treated equally without providing reasonable
discrimination, then it may not always result in fairness and
justice. To provide fair justice to everyone, it is very important
to take into consideration the needs and conditions of different
individuals or groups. The critics stated that for a particular
reasonable classification, different judgements or
interpretations may arise from various perspectives. So it is
important for the Judiciary to provide clear and specific
principles and guidelines for determining the requirements of
classification.

Therefore, it is very much necessary to ensure that while using

this reasonable discrimination, the doctrine of reasonable
classification should be able to create a balance by recognising
different realities while upholding the principles of equality as
mentioned in Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Judicial pronouncements
In the case of State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar
(1952), the Supreme Court of India upheld the distinction
between the object of the Act and the basis of classification,
which should be examined carefully before passing any
order. Before passing any decree regarding the classification,
it must be examined carefully. The following two conditions
must be fulfilled-
It should be based on an intelligible differentia that makes
a distinction between one group of people and another.

The differentia must have a reasonable connection with

the purpose sought by the law.

It is the responsibility of the courts to make sure that there

exists a relationship between the differentia and the objectives
of the legislators. The classification can be declared
discriminatory in nature if the basis for it is unreasonable. It is
the duty of the courts to prevent any unfairness or arbitrariness
in treatment.

In the case of Madhu Limaye v. the Superintendent, Tihar

Jail (1975), the case was filed against the discriminatory
treatment of prisoners at Tihar Jail. The European prisoners
were treated differently from the Indian prisoners. They
were given nutritious food and treated in a better way than
the Indian prisoners. So the Indian prisoners challenged this
kind of discrimination before the Supreme Court. The Apex
Court observed that this kind of behaviour violates Article 14
: