UPSC Prelims 2021 Q85: Indian Polity – Constitutional Articles
- (a) Article 14
- (b) Article 28
- (c) Article 32
- (d) Article 44
Answer: (a) Article 14
Explanation
Unguided Discretionary Power: Which Article Violated?
Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws. It prohibits arbitrary State action.
| Article | What it Protects |
|---|---|
| Article 14 | Equality before law + prohibition of arbitrariness |
| Article 28 | Freedom from religious instruction in state-funded institutions |
| Article 32 | Right to constitutional remedies |
| Article 44 | Uniform Civil Code (DPSP) |
A law conferring UNGUIDED and UNCONTROLLED discretionary power on executive violates Article 14 because it enables arbitrary application of the law.
Foundation case: E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) - Justice P.N. Bhagwati laid down that 'equality is antithetic to arbitrariness'. Arbitrariness violates Article 14. Further reinforced in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978).
Answer: (a) Article 14.
Why each option is right or wrong
- (a) CORRECT. Unguided and uncontrolled discretionary power violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) because arbitrariness is inherently anti-equality. Established in E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) - 'equality is antithetic to arbitrariness'.
- (b) Incorrect. Article 28 deals with religious instruction in educational institutions.
- (c) Incorrect. Article 32 is Right to Constitutional Remedies (writ jurisdiction of Supreme Court).
- (d) Incorrect. Article 44 is Uniform Civil Code (Directive Principle, not enforceable).
Key point
Unguided/uncontrolled executive discretion = violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) because arbitrariness is anti-equality. Principle: 'Equality is antithetic to arbitrariness' - E.P. Royappa v. State of TN (1974). Reinforced in Maneka Gandhi (1978).
Remember
A legislation conferring UNGUIDED and UNCONTROLLED discretionary power on executive authorities violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) of the Constitution. This is based on the principle that 'equality is antithetic to arbitrariness' laid down in E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) and reinforced in Maneka Gandhi (1978). Correct answer: (a).
Common mistakes
- Not knowing the doctrine of 'non-arbitrariness' emerging from Article 14 (Royappa 1974, Maneka Gandhi 1978).
- Confusing Article 14 (equality/non-arbitrariness) with Article 21 (due process) - both often invoked together.
- Assuming discretionary power is always constitutional. Unguided discretion falls foul of the Royappa principle.
Exam tip
Article 14 doctrines: (i) Reasonable classification (Anwar Ali Sarkar 1952), (ii) Non-arbitrariness (E.P. Royappa 1974), (iii) Substantive due process (Maneka Gandhi 1978), (iv) Equal pay for equal work (Randhir Singh 1982). Together they form the modern equality jurisprudence.
Sources
- E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) 4 SCC 3
- M. Laxmikanth - Indian Polity (Chapter on Fundamental Rights)