Judiciary

Answer: (a) The principle of natural justice

'Due process of law', borrowed from the US Constitution, lets courts ask not only whether a law was properly made but whether the law itself is fair, just and reasonable. At its core it is the principle of natural justice: no one is condemned unheard and no one judges their own cause.

• ✓ (a) Due process asks whether a law and its procedure are fair, not only whether it was properly made. In Maneka Gandhi (1978) the Supreme Court held that the Article 21 procedure must be right, just and fair, and that natural justice, such as a fair hearing, is part of that fairness.
• ✗ (b) 'Procedure established by law' is the narrower phrase actually used in Article 21: it asks only whether a validly enacted law was followed, which is why the framers preferred it to due process.
• ✗ (d) Equality before law is a separate guarantee under Article 14, not the meaning of due process.

Remember · Article 21 says 'procedure established by law'; courts have read in 'due process' (fair, just, reasonable; natural justice) since Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978).

📘 Read it in NCERT: Class 11 Indian Constitution at Work, Ch 2 (practise this chapter)

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). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect

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.

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). Permalink · Report an error