Article 14

Article 14 of the Constitution of India forms the foundation of the constitutional guarantee of equality. It enshrines the principle that every individual is equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. As one of the most significant provisions in Part III (Fundamental Rights), Article 14 embodies the rule of law, ensuring that no person—regardless of status, position, or power—is above the law and that all individuals receive fair and just treatment under it.

Text of Article 14

“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 contains two complementary expressions—“equality before the law” and “equal protection of the laws”—which together guarantee both formal and substantive equality.

Key Elements and Concepts

1. Equality Before the LawThis phrase, derived from the British concept of rule of law propounded by A. V. Dicey, implies the absence of any special privilege in favour of any individual or group. It ensures that every person, irrespective of their social or economic status, is equally subject to the jurisdiction of ordinary law and ordinary courts. No one is above the law, not even the State.
2. Equal Protection of the LawsBorrowed from the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, this clause focuses on substantive equality. It mandates that all individuals in similar situations must be treated alike and that laws should operate uniformly upon those who are similarly placed. However, it also recognises that unequal treatment of unequals is not a violation of equality—permitting reasonable classification where necessary for achieving social justice.

Scope and Application

Article 14 applies to all persons, not merely to Indian citizens. It extends protection to foreigners and legal entities such as corporations within India’s territory. It also binds the State as defined under Article 12, which includes the government, legislatures, and all authorities under their control.
The guarantee of equality under Article 14 covers legislative, executive, and judicial actions, ensuring that no organ of the State acts arbitrarily or discriminates without a rational basis.

Judicial Interpretation and Evolution

Over time, the Supreme Court of India has given a broad and dynamic interpretation to Article 14, expanding its reach beyond mere formal equality to include substantive fairness and protection against arbitrariness.

Early Judicial Approach

• State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952):The Court struck down a special criminal law that created unequal procedures, holding it violative of Article 14. This case laid the foundation for the doctrine of reasonable classification, requiring that any legislative distinction must rest on intelligible differentia and have a rational nexus to the objective sought.

Expansion of Scope

• E. P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974):The Supreme Court gave a new dimension to Article 14 by holding that arbitrariness and equality are sworn enemies. It ruled that any arbitrary action by the State is inherently unequal and thus unconstitutional. This case marked the shift from a classification-based approach to an arbitrariness-based test of equality.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978):The Court further broadened Article 14’s interpretation, linking it with Articles 19 and 21. It held that any “procedure established by law” must be fair, just, and reasonable, and not arbitrary or oppressive. This integrated interpretation reinforced the principle that all State actions must conform to standards of fairness and non-arbitrariness.

Affirmative Action and Social Justice

• Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992):Commonly known as the Mandal Commission case, this judgment upheld the constitutional validity of reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in public employment. The Court clarified that Article 14 does not forbid reasonable classification for achieving substantive equality. Affirmative action measures, when designed to promote equality and rectify historical disadvantages, are consistent with Article 14.
• D. S. Nakara v. Union of India (1983):The Supreme Court held that differential treatment in pension schemes for government employees retiring before and after a certain date violated Article 14. The ruling emphasised that classification must not be arbitrary and must serve a rational purpose.

Doctrines Developed Under Article 14

1. Doctrine of Reasonable Classification
   • Permits the State to classify persons, objects, or situations for differential treatment, provided two conditions are met:
     • The classification is based on an intelligible differentia distinguishing persons or things grouped together from others left out.
     • The differentia has a rational nexus with the legislative objective.
2. Doctrine of Arbitrariness
   • Evolved in the post-Royappa and Maneka Gandhi era, this doctrine holds that arbitrary action violates Article 14. The focus shifted from formal classification to substantive fairness and reasonableness in State action.
3. Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation and Non-Arbitrariness
   • Developed to ensure that State authorities do not act capriciously and that individuals are treated fairly in administrative decisions.

Exceptions and Permissible Distinctions

While Article 14 ensures equality, it allows for permissible distinctions and affirmative action to achieve social justice and remove existing inequalities.

• Reasonable Classification:The State may enact laws differentiating between groups if such distinctions are based on rational and justifiable grounds—for example, separate laws for juveniles or special provisions for women and children.
• Affirmative Action (Protective Discrimination):Measures like reservations in education and employment are constitutionally valid to promote equality of opportunity among historically disadvantaged groups. These are reinforced by Articles 15(4) and 16(4), which explicitly authorise positive discrimination.

Related Constitutional Provisions

• Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
• Article 16: Ensures equality of opportunity in public employment.
• Article 17: Abolishes untouchability.
• Article 18: Abolishes titles (except for military or academic distinctions).

Together, these articles create a comprehensive framework of equality, both formal and substantive, ensuring fairness across all spheres of governance.

Impact on Legislation and Governance

Article 14 influences every sphere of legislative and administrative functioning. Legislators must ensure that laws comply with the equality principle, while courts constantly review State actions for arbitrariness or discrimination.
Through judicial activism, the courts have expanded the reach of Article 14 to include protection against arbitrary executive decisions, unfair administrative practices, and even economic or environmental injustice.

Landmark Judgments Reinforcing Article 14

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973):Recognised Article 14 as part of the basic structure of the Constitution, making it immune from amendment that would destroy its essence.
• Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018):Decriminalised consensual same-sex relations, holding that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code violated Articles 14, 15, and 21 by being arbitrary and discriminatory.
• Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018):Struck down Section 497 of the IPC (adultery law) as unconstitutional for violating equality and personal liberty, reaffirming that gender-based discrimination cannot be justified under Article 14.

Constitutional Significance

Article 14 is the heart of constitutional democracy in India. It guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws, forming the basis of all other rights and freedoms. It embodies the rule of law, ensuring that the State acts fairly, rationally, and without bias.