reasonable classification

Article 14 forbids class legislation but permits classification. A law that treats a class differently is valid if (1) the classification is founded on an intelligible differentia, which distinguishes those grouped together from those left out, and (2) the differentia has a rational relation to the object of the law. This twin test was settled in Anwar Ali Sarkar and many later cases.

The test checks the classification, not the wisdom of the policy. Since E.P. Royappa and Maneka Gandhi the Court also treats arbitrariness as a separate ground: a law or action that is arbitrary violates Article 14 even if it is not a classification at all. The object of the law must itself be lawful; a classification serving a discriminatory object fails.

Example

Special courts for a vague class of “cases” chosen by the government failed the test of reasonable classification in Anwar Ali Sarkar.

In Indian law

• Article 14, Constitution of India
• State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, 1952 INSC 1
• E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1973 INSC 213: equality is antithetic to arbitrariness

See also

equality before law · reservation · fundamental rights

Read more in the study notes

• Information leading to discovery and confession of a co-accused (sections 23 proviso and 24) (Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam)
• Article 14: equality before law and the new doctrine of arbitrariness (Constitutional Law I)
• Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse (Constitutional Law II)
• Equality, affirmative action and the impact of privatisation (Indian Constitutional Law - New Challenges)
• Judicial review: notions, foundations and theories (Judicial and Legislative Process)
• The legislative draftsman; constitutional values, the General Clauses Act and interpretation as limits on drafting (Judicial and Legislative Process)