18th November 2023 (9 Topics)
HC quashes Haryana law on 75% quota in Private jobs to residents
Context:
Underlining that a government cannot discriminate against individuals merely because they do not belong to a particular state, the Punjab and Haryana HC quashed a law that provided 75 per cent reservation in private jobs to residents of the state.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently declared the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 unconstitutional, striking down the provision that mandated 75% reservation in private jobs for Haryana residents.
- Constitutional Infringement:
- The High Court emphasized that the law violated Part III of the Constitution, which safeguards fundamental rights.
- The provision was deemed ultra vires and ineffective from its inception.
- Discrimination Concerns:
- The bench underscored that a government cannot discriminate based on an individual's state of origin.
- Private employers were deemed free to recruit from the open market, especially for roles paying less than Rs 30,000 per month.
- State Intervention Limits:
- The court argued that the State cannot dictate private employers' hiring practices contrary to constitutional principles.
- It highlighted the impracticality of restricting a builder from employing skilled workers based on their regional expertise.
- Intrusion into Fundamental Rights:
- Petitions challenging the law argued that it infringed on the fundamental rights of private employers under Article 19 of the Constitution.
- The law was criticized for creating division among citizens based on their domicile.
- Concept of Common Citizenship:
- The court noted that the law created an undesirable division among citizens, contrary to the constitutional concept of common citizenship.
- It rejected the argument that unemployment among local youth justified such classification.
Government's Defense:
- The Haryana government contended that the law did not discriminate in central or state government employment or in organizations owned by them.
- It was the aim of the government that the Haryana youth get jobs in newly formed industries.
- It asserted that while birthplace-based reservation might violate constitutional provisions, employment based on domicile adheres to Article 15(1) of the Constitution.
- The government claimed that unemployed local youth constituted a distinct class, justifying their preferential treatment in private sector employment.
Analysis and Implications:
- The court's ruling sets a precedent against regional discrimination in employment and reinforces the constitutional right of private entities to conduct their affairs without undue interference.
- It highlights the importance of upholding the principles of common citizenship and individual rights over region-based preferences.
- The decision could have broader implications for similar laws in other states and promotes a more egalitarian approach to employment practices.
The High Court's decision strikes down a law deemed violative of constitutional principles, reinforcing the foundational tenets of equality and non-discrimination. This ruling is expected to shape future legal discourse on the balance between regional considerations and individual rights in employment matters.
Courses
Study
Notes
Home
Resources
More
