The Constitution (One Hundred and Second Amendment) Act, 2018 gave:
Constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).
It inserted:
102nd Amendment → NCBC Constitutional Status + Article 338B + Article 342A + Article 366(26C) + SEBC Constitutional Framework.
India had a long-standing constitutional and policy framework concerning:
Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs).
The:
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC)
was originally established as a:
Statutory body
under the:
National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.
SCs and STs already had constitutional commissions.
The amendment sought to give:
Similar constitutional status to the NCBC.
The amendment aimed to:
The NCBC deals with:
Socially and Educationally Backward Classes.
NCBC:
Statutory body.
NCBC:
Constitutional body.
The amendment inserted:
Article 338B.
National Commission for Backward Classes.
After the 102nd Amendment, NCBC became:
A constitutional body.
NCSC → Article 338.
NCST → Article 338A.
NCBC → Article 338B.
The Commission consists of:
They are appointed by:
The President.
The President appoints the Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and Members.
Their:
Conditions of service and tenure
are determined according to:
Law/rules made under the constitutional framework.
Article 338B gives the Commission functions including:
The Commission submits reports to:
The President.
The President causes them to be laid before:
Parliament.
The NCBC has:
Powers of a civil court
while investigating matters within its constitutional functions.
The Union and States are expected to:
Consult the Commission on major policy matters affecting SEBCs.
The Commission therefore has:
Advisory and monitoring functions.
The amendment inserted:
Article 342A.
It originally provided the constitutional framework for:
Specification of socially and educationally backward classes.
Under the original text introduced by the 102nd Amendment:
The President could specify SEBCs in relation to a State or Union Territory through public notification.
Parliament could:
By law, include or exclude a class from the Central List of SEBCs.
The:
Central List of SEBCs
is used for purposes of the:
Union/Central Government.
The Central List is distinct from:
State-specific backward-class lists.
The amendment inserted:
Article 366(26C).
It defined:
"Socially and educationally backward classes"
for constitutional purposes.
NCBC.
Specification of SEBCs.
Definition of SEBCs.
338B = Commission.
342A = Classes.
366(26C) = Definition.
| Body | Article | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| NCSC | 338 | Scheduled Castes |
| NCST | 338A | Scheduled Tribes |
| NCBC | 338B | SEBCs |
338 → SC.
338A → ST.
338B → Backward Classes.
The constitutional status strengthened:
Backward-class safeguards became subject to constitutional institutional oversight.
The most important later controversy concerned:
Who has the power to identify SEBCs for reservation purposes?
After Article 342A:
Could States independently identify SEBCs for their own reservation policies?
The issue became central in:
Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. Chief Minister, Maharashtra, 2021.
Commonly known as:
Maratha Reservation Case.
The Supreme Court interpreted the 102nd Amendment as meaning that:
The President's specification under Article 342A identified the SEBCs for the Central List, and States/UTs did not have independent constitutional power to make their own SEBC lists under the 2018 framework.
This interpretation created concern about:
State reservation powers.
States argued that:
Reservation policies require State-specific identification of backward classes.
A single Central identification framework could:
Reduce State flexibility.
Parliament responded through:
105th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021.
To restore/clarify the power of:
States and Union Territories
to prepare and maintain their own:
SEBC lists.
→ Constitutionalised NCBC and introduced Article 342A.
→ Restricted interpretation of State SEBC identification power.
→ Clarified/restored State and UT power to identify SEBCs for their own purposes.
After the 105th Amendment:
Parliament/Central framework.
States and Union Territories can identify SEBCs for their own purposes.
The:
Central List
and:
State List of backward classes
can be:
Different.
Social and educational backwardness may vary:
Regionally.
The constitutional evolution reflects:
Asymmetric and cooperative federalism.
→ Central List.
→ Their own SEBC identification for State/UT purposes.
Many States have their own:
State Backward Classes Commissions.
The 102nd Amendment:
Did not eliminate State Backward Classes Commissions.
NCBC operates primarily at the:
Union constitutional level.
State institutions:
Operate under State laws/frameworks.
Giving NCBC constitutional status does not mean:
Every recommendation of NCBC is automatically binding.
NCBC has:
Constitutional monitoring, investigative and advisory functions.
The Commission can:
Policy decisions remain with:
Competent constitutional authorities.
Article 16(4) permits reservation in public employment for:
Backward classes of citizens
which, in the opinion of the State, are:
Not adequately represented in State services.
Article 15(4) allows special provisions for:
Socially and educationally backward classes,
as well as:
The 102nd Amendment:
Did not itself create a new percentage of reservation.
Instead, it created:
Constitutional institutions and identification framework.
102nd Amendment:
✅ Constitutional status to NCBC.
✅ SEBC identification framework.
❌ Did not itself impose a universal reservation quota.
The Commission also examines:
Whether safeguards provided for SEBCs are working effectively.
NCBC reports may contain:
NCBC → President → Parliament.
The amendment strengthens the constitutional architecture for:
Backward-class policy aims to reconcile:
Formal equality
with:
Substantive equality.
Treating unequals identically may:
Perpetuate disadvantage.
Therefore:
Constitutional special measures may promote substantive equality.
Reservation is not a purely Union matter.
It can involve:
The distinction between:
Central List
and:
State Lists
is constitutionally significant.
NCBC recommendations and backward-class policies remain subject to:
Judicial review.
The foundational reservation judgment is:
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992.
The Court addressed:
The 102nd Amendment:
Did not replace the Indra Sawhney framework.
It created:
A constitutional institutional and identification structure.
→ NCBC + SEBC framework.
→ EWS reservation.
OBC/SEBC ≠ EWS.
They are:
Different constitutional reservation categories.
→ Backward classes.
→ SC/ST political reservation extension and end of Anglo-Indian nominated representation.
| 102nd Amendment | 105th Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2018 | 2021 |
| NCBC constitutional status | State/UT SEBC identification clarified/restored |
| Article 338B | Amendments to SEBC framework |
| Article 342A introduced | Article 342A modified |
| Federal controversy followed | Federal role reinforced |
→ Cooperative societies.
→ NCBC.
97 → Cooperatives.
102 → Backward Classes Commission.
→ GST.
→ NCBC.
101 → Tax.
102 → Backward Classes.
→ NCBC/SEBC.
→ Women's reservation.
102 → Backward Classes.
106 → Women.
2018.
Constitutional status to NCBC.
Article 338B.
Article 342A.
Article 366(26C).
NCBC.
SEBC specification framework.
Definition of SEBC.
Constitutional body after amendment.
President.
Chairperson + Vice-Chairperson + three Members.
President → Parliament.
Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil, 2021.
Maratha Reservation Case.
State identification power issue.
2021.
Clarified/restored State/UT power to identify SEBCs for their own purposes.
NCBC was always a constitutional body.
❌ Wrong.
It became constitutional through:
102nd Amendment.
NCBC is under Article 338.
❌ Wrong.
338:
NCSC.
338A:
NCST.
338B:
NCBC.
Article 342A defines SEBC.
❌ Incomplete.
Article 342A:
Specification framework.
Article 366(26C):
Definition of SEBC.
The 102nd Amendment created EWS reservation.
❌ Wrong.
103rd Amendment:
The 102nd Amendment created OBC reservation.
❌ Wrong.
It constitutionalised:
NCBC and SEBC identification framework.
Reservation jurisprudence predates it.
After the 102nd Amendment, State governments permanently lost all power over backward-class identification.
❌ Current position is more nuanced.
The 2021 Supreme Court interpretation created the controversy, and the:
105th Amendment
restored/clarified State and UT power for their own purposes.
The 2021 Maratha judgment struck down the 102nd Amendment entirely.
❌ Wrong.
It interpreted its effect on:
State SEBC identification powers.
The 105th Amendment abolished NCBC.
❌ Wrong.
NCBC remains:
A constitutional body.
NCBC directly grants reservation quotas.
❌ Wrong.
It:
Monitors, investigates and recommends.
SEBC and EWS are the same category.
❌ Wrong.
SEBC/OBC:
Social and educational backwardness.
EWS:
Economic criteria under Articles 15(6)/16(6).
Article 338B deals with SCs.
❌ Wrong.
NCBC.
Article 366(26C) deals with Scheduled Tribes.
❌ Wrong.
It defines:
Socially and educationally backward classes.
Article 366(25).
Indra Sawhney judgment.
NCBC established as statutory body.
102nd Constitutional Amendment.
Maratha Reservation judgment.
105th Constitutional Amendment.
1992 → Indra Sawhney.
1993 → Statutory NCBC.
2018 → Constitutional NCBC.
2021 → Maratha judgment.
2021 → 105th Amendment.
338 → NCSC.
338A → NCST.
338B → NCBC.
342 → Scheduled Tribes.
342A → SEBC framework.
366(25) → ST definition.
366(26C) → SEBC definition.
→ Article 338.
→ Article 338A.
→ Article 338B.
→ Articles 15(6), 16(6).
→ Union framework.
→ State/UT identification for State purposes after the 105th Amendment.
The amendment:
Elevated backward-class institutional protection to the constitutional level.
It strengthened:
The later 105th Amendment demonstrates:
The importance of balancing national standards with State-specific social realities.
NCBC became:
A permanent constitutional oversight institution.
Backwardness is:
Socially and regionally diverse.
Different:
Central and State lists
can create administrative complexity.
NCBC recommendations are not automatically:
Binding policy decisions.
Reservation policies remain subject to:
Constitutional scrutiny.
Backward-class identification can become:
Politically sensitive.
→ Institutional protection.
→ Centre-State role.
→ NCBC as constitutional body.
→ Substantive equality.
The 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018 transformed the National Commission for Backward Classes from a statutory institution into a constitutional body and established a constitutional framework for socially and educationally backward classes through Articles 338B, 342A and 366(26C).
2021: → Maratha Reservation judgment.
The interpretation affected:
State power to identify SEBCs.
2021: → 105th Amendment.
It clarified/restored:
State and UT power to identify SEBCs for their own purposes.
The 102nd Amendment strengthened constitutional protection for backward classes, while the subsequent 105th Amendment demonstrated that social-justice policy in India must balance constitutional equality, national standards and the federal diversity of States and Union Territories.
