Indra Sawhney Case — MCQ Practice

With reference to the Indra Sawhney case (1992), consider the following statements: 1. The Supreme Court held that reservations should not exceed 50% except in extraordinary circumstances. 2. The judgment mandated reservation in promotions for all backward classes. 3. The creamy layer concept was introduced to exclude advanced sections within backward classes. 4. The case upheld the constitutional validity of Mandal Commission recommendations. Which of the statements given above are correct?

The 'creamy layer' concept in the context of reservation policy refers to:

Which of the following constitutional articles were primarily interpreted in the Indra Sawhney case? 1. Article 14 (Equality before law) 2. Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination) 3. Article 16 (Equality of opportunity in public employment) 4. Article 21 (Right to life and personal liberty) 5. Article 340 (Appointment of commission to investigate backward classes)

The Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney case held that Article 16(4) is:

Consider the following statements about the impact of Indra Sawhney judgment: 1. It led to the 77th Constitutional Amendment allowing promotional reservations. 2. It established the National Commission for Backward Classes. 3. It resulted in the implementation of OBC reservations in higher education. 4. It mandated periodic review of backward class lists. Which statements are correct?