Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal has held that Article 14 of the Constitution of India (COI) prohibits negative discrimination. 

• This was held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Jyostnamayee Mishra v. The State of Odisha and Ors. (2025). 

What was the Background of Jyostnamayee Mishra v. The State of Odisha and Ors. Case? 

• Jyostnamayee Mishra (appellant) was employed as a peon in the State of Odisha government since 1978. 
• In 1999, she submitted her first representation seeking appointment to the post of Tracer.  
• Appellant had undergone a 3-month Tracer Training Course at the Institute of Survey and Mining Technology in 1997. 
• She repeatedly filed representations and applications to various government departments seeking promotion or appointment as a Tracer. 
• In some instances, other employees (Jhina Rani Mansingh and Lalatendu Rath) were promoted from peon to Tracer positions. 
• Appellant filed multiple legal applications before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal. 
• The Tribunal in various orders directed the state to consider her case for promotion. 
• The state initially rejected her representation citing recruitment ban and procedural issues. 
• The matter ultimately reached the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition challenging the Orissa High Court's order. 

What were the Court’s Observation? 

• The Supreme Court made the following observations:  
  • Systemic Procedural Irregularities: 
    • Identified fundamental flaws in recruitment documentation. 
    • Highlighted state authorities' casual approach to litigation. 
    • Noted repeated failures in producing correct statutory documents. 
  • Legal Interpretation: 
    • Conclusively established that Tracer posts must be 100% filled through direct recruitment. 
    • Rejected petitioner's discrimination claim. 
    • Emphasized that illegal past practices cannot be perpetuated. 
  • Broader Institutional Critique: 
    • Criticized the repeated documentary and procedural mismanagement. 
    • Highlighted the need for responsible legal drafting. 
    • Pointed out the unnecessary litigation generated by administrative inefficiency. 
• Based on the above observations the appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court. 

What is Article 14?  

• Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950 affirms the fundamental right of “equality before the law” and “equal protection of law” to all persons.  
• The first expression “equality before law” is of England origin and the second expression “equal protection of law” has been taken from the American Constitution.  
• Equality is a cardinal principle enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India as its primary objective.  
• It is a system of treating all human beings with fairness and impartiality.  
• It also establishes a system of non-discrimination based on grounds mentioned in Article 15 of the Constitution of India.  

What are Exceptions of Article 14?   

The above rule of equality is not absolute, and there are several exceptions to it. For instance, foreign Diplomats   

• Constitutional validity can extend to laws applicable to a single individual or entity, if special circumstances warrant such classification.  
• There's a presumption of constitutionality for enacted laws. The burden of proving unconstitutionality lies with the challenger.  
• This presumption may be rebutted if a law arbitrarily singles out an individual or class without rational differentiation.  
• Courts presume legislative understanding of societal needs and experience-based problem-solving through laws.  
• To uphold constitutionality, courts may consider common knowledge, reports, historical context, and conceivable factual scenarios.  
• Legislatures may address varying degrees of harm, focusing on the most pressing issues.  
• While good faith is presumed, courts won't automatically assume unknown reasons justify discriminatory legislation.  
• Classification can be based on various factors like geography, occupation, or objectives.  
• Perfect scientific or mathematical equality isn't required; similarity of treatment suffices.  
• Article 14's equal protection applies to both substantive and procedural law. 

What is Reasonable Classification Under Article 14 of the COI?   

What are Grounds for Reasonable Classification?