PYQ Vault · Paper 1 · Justice

Dr. Ambedkar’s idea of social justice leads to ‘egalitarian justice’ as compared to Rawls’ ‘justice as fairness’ which aims at the notion of ‘pure procedural justice’. Comment.

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

Route 1 both are egalitarians → share the end, differ in route → substantive vs procedural

Route 2 question separates two routes to equality → Ambedkar reshapes outcomes / Rawls designs a fair procedure and accepts its result

Body flow

Ambedkar: caste oppression + social humiliation → justice never merely formal → “simply another name for liberty, equality, fraternity” → must become material facts → political equality vs economic inequality threatens democracy → substantive, group-conscious remedy (reservations, labour rights, land redistribution, state action) → Rawls: fair starting point → original position + veil of ignorance → identity-blind, unanimous choice → whatever chosen is just → equal liberties + fair opportunity + Difference Principle → inequality only if it helps the least advantaged

Counter-view

contrast must be qualified → Rawls’ procedure is already egalitarian → Difference Principle can itself justify reservations / welfare → so divergence is route, not goal → Ambedkar = direct, group-based caste correction / Rawls = identity-blind least-advantaged standard → identity-blindness may miss a birth-fixed hierarchy

Conclusion routes

Route 1 shared egalitarian aim, different routes (group correction vs fair procedure)

Route 2 Indian Constitution (justice, liberty, equality, fraternity) resonates most with Ambedkar’s egalitarian justice

Model answer

Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.

Handwritten model answer — UPSC PSIR 2022, Justice