Class legislation

Class legislation refers to laws that discriminate in favour of or against a particular class or group of people without a reasonable or justifiable basis. Such legislation violates the principle of equality before the law and equal protection of laws, which are fundamental to constitutional governance in democratic societies. It occurs when the legislature enacts laws conferring privileges on a specific group or imposing disabilities upon others purely based on class, caste, religion, or status, rather than on rational and objective distinctions.

Meaning and Concept

The term class legislation implies legislation that creates arbitrary classifications between citizens, favouring one class while burdening another. It stands in contrast to reasonable classification, which the law allows when distinctions are founded upon intelligible differentia and have a rational relation to a legitimate objective of the legislation.
In simple terms, class legislation is discriminatory law-making — where people similarly situated are treated unequally without valid justification. It violates the rule of equality, a cornerstone of modern constitutional democracies.

Constitutional Basis in India

In India, the prohibition of class legislation is embodied in Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees:

“The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”

This Article embodies two distinct but related concepts:

1. Equality before the law — a negative concept implying the absence of special privilege.
2. Equal protection of the laws — a positive concept requiring that all persons similarly situated be treated alike under like circumstances.

While Article 14 permits reasonable classification, it absolutely forbids class legislation. The distinction between the two lies in whether the classification is based on an intelligible and justifiable principle or on arbitrary discrimination.

Reasonable Classification vs. Class Legislation

To determine whether a law is valid or amounts to class legislation, the courts apply the doctrine of reasonable classification. The test was laid down in State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952) and later affirmed in several cases.
For a classification to be reasonable and not amount to class legislation, two conditions must be satisfied:

1. Intelligible Differentia: The classification must be based on a clear and reasonable distinction between persons or things grouped together and those left out.
2. Rational Nexus: The differentia must have a rational relationship to the object sought to be achieved by the legislation.

If either of these conditions fails, the law becomes arbitrary and amounts to class legislation, violating Article 14.

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in defining and preventing class legislation through the interpretation of Article 14. Several landmark cases illustrate this principle.

• State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952): The Supreme Court struck down a law allowing the State to refer certain criminal cases to special courts without clear criteria. The Court held that arbitrary selection without a rational basis amounted to class legislation.
• State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Singh (1960): A law treating one group of government employees differently from others without valid reason was invalidated as discriminatory.
• E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974): The Court observed that arbitrariness and equality are sworn enemies; any arbitrary act of the State is inherently unequal and, therefore, violative of Article 14.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Court broadened the scope of Article 14 by linking it with Articles 19 and 21, holding that any State action must be fair, reasonable, and non-arbitrary.
• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib (1981): The Court reiterated that equality is antithetical to arbitrariness; thus, any arbitrary classification or action amounts to class legislation.

Through these rulings, the judiciary has ensured that Article 14 remains a bulwark against class-based discrimination and arbitrariness in law-making.

Examples of Class Legislation

1. Caste-Based Discrimination: Laws granting benefits or imposing restrictions solely on the basis of caste, without objective justification, would amount to class legislation.
2. Economic Privileges: Legislation exempting certain wealthy groups or corporations from taxes without rational policy basis.
3. Unequal Criminal Treatment: Laws prescribing harsher penalties for the same offence based on the offender’s social or economic status.
4. Selective Benefits: Government schemes favouring specific political or religious groups for non-legitimate reasons.

Such laws are inconsistent with the equality guarantee and can be struck down as unconstitutional.

Permissible Classifications

It must be noted that not every classification is invalid. The Constitution allows the legislature to make distinctions when justified by social, economic, or administrative necessity. Such permissible classifications include:

• Reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes (Articles 15(4) and 16(4));
• Protective labour laws for workers;
• Special provisions for women and children;
• Taxation laws based on income or property classes.

These distinctions are affirmative actions, designed to achieve substantive equality rather than create arbitrary divisions. They are constitutionally valid because they rest on rational and moral foundations consistent with the Preamble’s goal of justice and equality.

Tests to Identify Class Legislation

Courts apply the following tests to determine whether a law amounts to class legislation:

1. Is there a valid and intelligible basis of classification?
2. Does the classification have a rational connection with the legislative purpose?
3. Is the law arbitrary, excessive, or discriminatory in operation?
4. Does it deny equal treatment to similarly situated persons?

If the answer to these questions reveals arbitrariness or discrimination, the law will be struck down as class legislation.

Class Legislation in Other Jurisdictions

The principle against class legislation is not unique to India. In the United States, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying any person equal protection of the laws. The U.S. Supreme Court, in cases like Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) and Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942), struck down discriminatory laws as unconstitutional class legislation.
Similarly, in England, though the concept of a written constitution does not exist, the common law principle of equality before the law serves as a safeguard against arbitrary discrimination by the State.

Constitutional Philosophy and Rationale

The prohibition of class legislation upholds the rule of law, ensuring that every individual stands equal before the legal system. It prevents the concentration of privilege and power in the hands of a few and protects the weaker sections from arbitrary exclusion.
This philosophy aligns with the Preamble’s vision of “equality of status and of opportunity” and promotes a welfare-oriented democracy. The framers of the Constitution intended that the State should not enact laws favouring one group at the expense of another without compelling reasons of social justice or necessity.

Contemporary Relevance

In contemporary governance, debates over affirmative action, reservations, subsidies, and economic reforms often raise questions about the boundary between reasonable classification and class legislation. Courts continue to play a crucial role in maintaining this balance, ensuring that policies aimed at promoting equality do not themselves become instruments of discrimination.
For instance, while upholding reservation policies, the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) emphasised that affirmative action must not lead to excessive or perpetual favouritism, as that would contravene the principle of equality and result in reverse discrimination.