Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?
I. As per the Supreme Court judgments, only social circumstances can be taken as a determinant of backwardness.
II. The constitution stipulates that an amendment should not alter its basic structure.
III. Under certain circumstances amendment might be allowed to change the basic structure of the constitution.
Directions: Read the following passage and then answer the question that follows:
PASSAGE – I
By setting up a Group of Ministers (GoM) to study the possibilities of a Constitution Amendment Bill to provide for job reservation to the forward castes on economic grounds, the Union Government has set the ball rolling for yet another controversy on the concept of quotas. The Prime Minister's commitment came in response to a resolution orchestrated by the Chief Minister recommending statutory changes to reserve 14 per cent of Government jobs for the poor among the forward castes. The Chief Minister's shrewd move put immense pressure on parties and groups across the political spectrum. A campaign on the same issue by the Social Justice Front has been in full swing for some time; it gained strength after Jats were included in the list of Other Backward Classes a couple of years ago.
In a State where the forward castes continue to play a significant role in determining election outcomes, CM's move set the terms of the discourse. The high level of unemployment is a general problem, but it is particularly severe among people belonging to the forward castes. The proportion of educated unemployed should, after all, be higher among the forward castes than among castes kept out of the education system over the years. Political parties across the spectrum can hardly afford to gloss over this reality in a context where the Government continues to be seen as the provider of jobs. Add to this the sense of power that comes with Government jobs in most parts of India and one can understand the desperation in the quest for such opportunities.
A constitutional amendment, however, is not as simple as it is made out to be. A proposal to include the poor among the forward castes in the reservation bracket was made by the Congress party in the context of implementing the Mandal Commission's recommendation. The Narasimha Rao Government's proposal to reserve 10 per cent of Government jobs for the poor among the forward castes was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1992. Article 15 (4) of the Constitution, inserted by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, is very specific. The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes aside, it sanctions special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes. Article 16 (4) sanctions reservation in Government jobs for any backward class of citizens, which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. Article 340 relates to the appointment of a Commission to investigate the conditions of backward classes. What is established by a series of Supreme Court judgments is that only social and educational circumstances can be taken as determinants of backwardness. The proposal now is to amend the Constitution, but amendments are subject to judicial review and need to avoid falling foul of the `basic structure' doctrine propounded and refined by the Supreme Court. A consensus among political parties might turn out to be a necessary but insufficient condition for making reservation for the poor among the forward castes a feasible proposition.