निम्नलिखित कथनों पर विचार कीजिए :
- कथन–I: भारत के उच्चतम न्यायालय ने अपने कतिपय निर्णयों में यह विचारण किया है कि भारत के संविधान के अनुच्छेद 16(4) के अधीन बनाई गई आरक्षण नीतियाँ प्रशासन की दक्षता को बनाए रखने के लिए अनुच्छेद 335 द्वारा सीमित होंगी।
- कथन–II: भारत के संविधान का अनुच्छेद 335 ‘प्रशासन की दक्षता’ पद को परिभाषित करता है।
उपर्युक्त कथनों के बारे में, निम्नलिखित में से कौन-सा एक सही है?
Read this question in English
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I. The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India would be limited by Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of administration.
Statement-II. Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term ‘efficiency of administration’.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I · (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I · (c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect · (d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
उत्तर और व्याख्या · explanation in English
Answer: (c) कथन–I सही है किन्तु कथन–II गलत है
Statement-I is correct: the Supreme Court, notably in M. Nagaraj (2006), has treated Article 335 as a limit that reservation in services must respect. Statement-II is wrong because Article 335 only says SC and ST claims are considered consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration; it never defines that phrase.
- ✓ Statement-I The Court has held that the State must comply with Article 335 when providing reservation in public employment, in addition to showing backwardness and inadequacy of representation with data (M. Nagaraj, as restated in Jarnail Singh, 2022).
- ✗ Statement-II Article 335 uses the words 'efficiency of administration' without defining them. The Court has said there is no fixed yardstick for efficiency, which varies with the facts of each case.
- ✓ (c) Only Statement-I is right, so the option that accepts Statement-I and rejects Statement-II is the answer.
Remember · Article 335: SC/ST claims to services are considered consistently with efficiency of administration. The Constitution does not define 'efficiency'; the Supreme Court treats it as a fact-specific test.
Sources
- Constitution of India, Article 335 (Legislative Department) ↗ “shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State”
- Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, Civil Appeal No. 629 of 2022, Supreme Court of India, 28 January 2022 (restating M. Nagaraj) ↗ “whether any constitutional limitation mentioned in Article 16(4) and Article 335 stood obliterated by the constitutional amendments resulting in Articles 16(4-A) and 16(4-B). … There is no fixed yardstick to identify equality, justice and efficiency which are variable factors and it depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.”
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2023, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). ·