Polity · 26 Aug 2026
In Union of India v. Rohith Nathan (2026), the Supreme Court struck down a 2004 DoPT clarification on the OBC creamy-layer test for violating Article 14. Which one of the following best describes the discriminatory distinction that was struck down?
With the Supreme Court's six-month implementation deadline expiring September 11, 2026 and the CSE-2025 Foundation Course due to begin imminently at LBSNAA, the Centre has sought directions limiting the judgment's retrospective reach to protect the "substantially concluded" CSE-2025 selection process from being reopened.
UPSC often probes the exact mechanism of a struck-down administrative rule rather than just its outcome - this question tests whether the aspirant grasps precisely which distinction was found unconstitutional, a common source of confusion given the case's overlapping numbers (2004 clarification vs. 1993 OM vs. 2026 judgment).
The 2004 DoPT clarification used two different creamy-layer yardsticks within the OBC category - post-equivalence for government employees' children, salary income alone for PSU/private-sector employees' children. The Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rohith Nathan (2026) struck this down as violating Article 14, giving government six months (till September 11, 2026) to implement the correction.
On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.