Local(Domicile based) Jobs Quota :

Different state legislatures have passed a 75% quota for locals in private sector jobs. In 2019, Andhra Pradesh was the first state to pass such legislation. In the private sector, Haryana has also passed regulations for domicile-based reservations. Jharkhand has presented a bill similar to this, while Karnataka has promised to implement a 100% reservation for Kannadigas in blue-collar occupations since 2016.

Recently Chief Minister of Punjab, Charanjeet Singh Channi announced that the Government will introduce a similar kind of law for Punjabis this Punjab will become the 5th state to join this group of 75% local jobs reservation. Although it is not clear that it will be for private-sector jobs or for.

Haryana’s private job quota :

Haryana government has brought in the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act 2020, this requires all firms in the state to set aside 75% of employees with a monthly gross pay or earnings of up to 30,000  rupees for local candidates. This law only applies to new hires, and it will not have any retroactive impact.

The Act covers all of the state's 'Employers.' Section 4 of Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act mandates all businesses, partnership firms, societies, trusts, limited liability partnership firms, and any individual or employer that employs 10 or more people in any manufacturing unit, trade, business, or operation are included.

The Act also allows an employer to limit the number of local candidates employed from any one district to 10% of the total number of local candidates. When an adequate number of local candidates of the desired skill, qualification, or proficiency is not available, the Act allows an employer to request an exemption from its mandatory requirement to employ 75 % of local candidates by submitting an application to the Designated Officer in the form and manner prescribed.

More Articles by Sidharth Shankar

Synchronized elections of state assemblies and general assembly

ALL ABOUT PERSONAL FINANCE

The logic behind this move:

 With the rising demand of industries demand for land to set up industries. The majority of the land demand is supplied by purchasing private agricultural properties as a result landowners are being displaced and deprived of their activity, resulting in a loss of their jobs and income. People in the area have claimed that industrialization has robbed them of their livelihood. (Agriculture mainly)The government has introduced laws to lower this gap.

The Constitutional validity of  reservations in jobs of the Private sector :

Article 16(3) empowers Parliament to adopt arrangements for domicile-based appointments for a class or classes of employment or appointments to offices under the Government of, or any local or other authority within, a State or Union territory.

This indicates that domicile-based reservations are constitutional in a restricted sense, meaning that they are only applicable to particular types of employment and appointments. Furthermore, only Parliament, not state legislatures, has the authority to enact such legislation. Most crucially, this Article solely applies to government employees and does not allow Parliament to apply it to the private sector.

The states' legislative activity in favour of domicile reservation is susceptible to two fundamental reasons: 

1. Articles 15(4), 15(5), 15(6), 16(4), and 16(6) of the Constitution contain provisions for reservations in the entrance to educational institutions and posts in government employment to support the progress of backward classes.

2. The Supreme Court has ruled that work in the private sector should not be reserved for any type of individual, including domiciles.

Reservations were limited to government organisations until 2005, when the country tacitly embraced a laissez-faire attitude toward the private sector, as evidenced by a reading of the Constitution. Even in 2005, reservations were expanded to a tight window comprising only private educational institute admissions. The Supreme Court dismissed the arguments for enforcing government restrictions and making reservations in private educational institutions in the TMA Pai Foundation case(2002). In PA Inamdarcase (2005), the ratio of this judegment was explicitly defined. In PA Inamdar, the Supreme Court stated that enabling government oversight and reservations in private educational establishments would have the effect of nationalising them. To nullify the above judicial decisions, the government enacted the 93rd Amendment to the Constitution in 2005, amending Article 15 by inserting clause (5), which allowed for reservation in private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the government, but excluded minority educational institutions as defined in Article 30. (1). Article 46 of Part IV of the Constitution on Directive Principles of State Policy, which also states that the state shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the population and protect them from social injustice, was invoked by the government for support.

The law appears to be in violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) [apart from reasonable restrictions]. The Karnataka High Court in judgement has previously challenged the Andhra Pradesh Employment of Local Candidates in Industries/Factories Act, 2019. Not only has the Court served notice on the State, but it is also said that "the statute may be unconstitutional." The Court’s decision in PA Inamdar, as cited above, applies to reservations in private-sector positions as well. Allowing reservations in the private sector would be tantamount to nationalisation and would reintroduce the license-raj system.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Constitution of India

2. The leaflet.

Synchronized elections of state assemblies and general assembly

 Synchronized elections of state assemblies and general assembly 

Conducting both Lok sabha and state assembly elections at a time once in five years is termed to be simultaneous or synchronized elections. Simultaneous elections should ideally indicate that elections to all three tiers of constitutional institutions are held in a coordinated and synchronized manner. This practically means that on a single day, a voter casts his vote for members of the government at all levels. During the first two decades after Independence that is before 1967, it used to be simultaneous, and once again it came into a discussion when the Law Commission of India along with the Election Commission has also expressed its support for the simultaneous elections. In its 79th report (presented to Parliament in December 2015), the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice looked at the feasibility of having simultaneous Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly elections. 

More articles by Sidharth Shankar:

SEDITION LAW PRESENT AND PAST

SECULARISM (1 of 2)

Between 1951-1967

In 1951-52, the first general elections for the Lok Sabha and all state legislatures were held simultaneously. This pattern was repeated in three successive general elections, in 1957, 1962, and 1967. However, due to the premature dissolution of certain Legislative assemblies, the cycle was disturbed for the first time in the 1968 and 1969 Legislative Assemblies. The Fourth Lok Sabha was dissolved prematurely in 1970, and new elections were conducted in 1971.

        

Synchronized election at all three levels 

Simultaneous elections should ideally indicate that elections to all three tiers of constitutional institutions are held in a coordinated and synchronized manner. On a single day, a voter casts his vote for members of the government at all levels. However, according to the Constitution, third-tier institutions are essentially a state responsibility. Furthermore, given the fact that State Election Commissions direct and regulate elections to third-tier institutions, as well as their overwhelming numbers in the country. The country is quite huge it would be impractical, but not impossible, to synchronize and coordinate the third-tier election timetables with the Lok Sabha and state election. The simultaneous election should not be taken literally simultaneous elections do not mean that voting across the country for Lok Sabha and State Assemblies needs to happen on a single day. This can be conducted in a phase-wise manner as per the existing practice provided voters in a particular constituency vote for both State Assembly and Lok Sabha the same day.

It is logical to conclude that the Indian political system is perpetually in election mode. With the exception of a few rare years throughout the Lok Sabha's typical 5-year term, the country sees elections to roughly 5-7 State Assemblies per year.

Skip to Conclusion

Simultaneous elections - legal and constitutional perspective 

Law commission headed by Justice B.S Chauhan former judge of Supreme court of India with other members under the ministry of law and justice of GOI recommended that:

1.  It is a good way to keep the country out of the election mode.

2. It will help the government save money while also easing the pressure on the administration and security personnel.

3. "Some unavoidable constitutional modifications" are recommended in the plan.

5. The Commission's analysis of the financial implications, logistical issues, the impact of the Model Code of Conduct, and constitutional and legal provisions in relation to holding simultaneous elections in India

6. The Commission has taken great effort to ensure that any suggestions it makes are in accordance with constitutional norms.

8. The Commission stated that great care was taken in developing the recommendations to ensure that people's rights were not jeopardized in any way.

Reasons why simultaneous elections are not going to happen very soon:

1. Terms of different state governments are ending on separate dates in different years.

2. Constitutional Amendments 

3. Legal Amendments

Focusing on the Constitutional and Legal amendments :

Constitutional amendments: No steps have been taken yet to amend the constitution to facilitate simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state legislatures.

Articles to focus on :

• Article 83: Which provides for the Tenure of Both the houses of Parliament 83(2) Provides 5-year tenure of Lok sabha. (from the date of first sitting)*

• Article 172 (1): It deals with 5-year tenure of the state legislature  (from the date of first sitting)*

• A similar kind of amendment in Emergency provisions deals with the extension of terms of houses to give uniformity to both state legislative assembly and Lok sabha.

• Article 85 (2)(b): It provides power to the President to dissolve Lok sabha.

•  Article 174 (2)(b):  Similar to Article 85 (2)(b)  here Governor has the power to dissolve State legislative assembly.

• Article 356:It is also relevant when it comes to premature dissolution of state legislative assembly where the Union government can take direct control of the state machinery if a state government is unable to function according to Constitutional provisions. 

Legal Amendments: Like in constitutional amendments there has been no attempt to alter the law to allow for simultaneous elections.

The Representation of People Act 1951, which governs the country's election procedures, also needs to be changed. The notice of General Elections to the Lok Sabha is governed by Section 14 of the Act

The concept should be debated primarily around four issues:

1. The financial burden on conducting elections. 

2. Administrative disturbances due to elections.

3. Political party campaign and financial cost.

4. Concerns of Local parties and local issues.

 Conclusion :

After going through lots of reports by commissions and committees the main concern of this system of election is that it will ease the government's financial burden and will lead to a better and more effective administration.  

Talking about financial burden there are several reports which claim that a single state legislative election costs approximately 200-300 crore rupees (INR). Similarly, you can survey any group of people whether they have faced any issues or delay in any time of administrative works during the election period or not. You will definitely get a big yes from them. But giving a conclusion like that isn't what we can rely on. Making it more practical, think practically how any departments can work effectively when 50-70% of their staff are busy with election duty. In simultaneous elections, they will also get busy but the difference is that they will not get busy frequently as of now in the always election mood.  

Even after knowing all these things, we should keep a close eye on the fact that due to the simultaneous election no harm should be there to one of the basic and peculiar features of our Constitution is Federalism. Along with that focus should be on the local issues which were raised by local /regional parties, they act as an agent of a better and pure democracy as they raise local issues and they better connect with people, the ultimate unit of democracy.

________________By Sidharth Shankar  ________________________

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. niti.gov.in   

2.  79th report (presented to Parliament in December 2015), the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee

3. Constitution of India

Conclusion to Synchronized elections of state assemblies and general assembly

 Conclusion to Synchronized elections of state assemblies and general assembly :

After going through lots of reports by commissions and committees the main concern of this system of election is that it will ease the government's financial burden and will lead to a better and more effective administration.  

Talking about financial burden there are several reports which claim that a single state legislative election costs approximately 200-300 crore rupees (INR). Similarly, you can survey any group of people whether they have faced any issues or delay in any time of administrative works during the election period or not. You will definitely get a big yes from them. But giving a conclusion like that isn't what we can rely on. Making it more practical, think practically how any departments can work effectively when 50-70% of their staff are busy with election duty. In simultaneous elections, they will also get busy but the difference is that they will not get busy frequently as of now in the always election mood.  

Even after knowing all these things, we should keep a close eye on the fact that due to the simultaneous election no harm should be there to one of the basic and peculiar features of our Constitution is Federalism. Along with that focus should be on the local issues which were raised by local /regional parties, they act as an agent of a better and pure democracy as they raise local issues and they better connect with people, the ultimate unit of democracy.