PYQ Vault · Paper 1 · Statutory & Constitutional Bodies
How far is the National Commission for Backward Classes an empowered body? Assess its role in the context of rising demand for backwardness among dominant communities.
How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
R1 empowerment real but partial → status without full force R2 statutory origin (Indra Sawhney) → constitutional upgrade (338B) → frame the "how far"
Body flow
Indra Sawhney 1992 + NCBC Act 1993 → 102nd Amendment / Art 338B → parity with NCSC & NCST → functions (inclusion /exclusion in OBC list, advice) → civil court powers + reports to Parliament → limits: non-binding, no definition of backwardness, weak data/staff → dominant-community demand → evidentiary weakness exposed → sub-categorisation guards advanced groups
Counter-view
form vs effect: constitutional status & inquiry powers → non- enforceable recommendations and dependence on government
Conclusion routes
rR! empowered in form, constrained in effect routes R2 real test = defending evidence-based classification against political pressure
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
