MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Haryana's 75% Local Job Quota Act Struck Down: P&H High Court Declared Unconstitutional Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 To Upholds Constitutional Morality and National Unity

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court declared The Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020, unconstitutional, upholding the fundamental principles of equality, non-discrimination, and freedom of profession enshrined in the Constitution of India. The Act, which mandated a 75% job reservation for local candidates in the private sector, faced severe legal scrutiny and was ultimately deemed to be in violation of Articles 14, 16, and 19 of the Constitution.

Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan, in their detailed judgment, observed, "The Act infringes on the constitutional principles of equality, non-discrimination, and freedom of profession," emphasizing the need to uphold the Doctrine of Basic Structure. The court unequivocally stated that the legislation's regionalist approach was detrimental to national unity and integration.

The judgment also highlighted the discriminatory nature of the provisions based on domicile or resident status for employment in the private sector. It underscored the unconstitutional implications of such policies, stating, "Discriminatory provisions based on domicile or resident status for employment in the private sector go against the Constitution."

Addressing the issue of freedom of profession, the court observed that the Act unduly restricted the freedom of private employers, conflicting with Article 19(1)(g). The court's stance was clear: "The restrictions imposed are not reasonable or justifiable under constitutional standards."

In a significant commentary on national integration, the court noted that the Act's approach was contrary to the constitutional mandate of national unity, stating, "The Act's regionalist approach is detrimental to national unity."

This judgment is a significant affirmation of constitutional rights and principles, particularly in the context of employment and non-discrimination. The court's decision to strike down the Act serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional morality and the importance of national integration in legislative policies.

The ruling has widespread implications for similar legislations across the country, setting a precedent for the examination of the constitutionality of state employment laws that may potentially infringe on fundamental rights and freedoms. The decision has been welcomed by legal experts and is seen as a reinforcement of the constitutional promise of equality and non-discrimination for all citizens, irrespective of their state of domicile or residence.

Date of Decision: 17 November  2023

IMT Industrial Association and another VS State of Haryana and another

Latest Legal News