Chat with us
General Studies 2024 GS Paper I 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Comment

GS Paper I — Q18

Despite comprehensive policies for equity and social justice, underprivileged sections are not yet getting the full benefits of…

Despite comprehensive policies for equity and social justice, underprivileged sections are not yet getting the full benefits of affirmative action envisaged by the Constitution. Comment. (Answer in 250 words) 15 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

समानता और सामाजिक न्याय की व्यापक नीतियों के बावजूद, अभी तक वंचित वर्गों को संविधान द्वारा परिकल्पित सकारात्मक कार्रवाई का पूरा लाभ नहीं मिल रहा है। टिप्पणी कीजिए। (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Q18 of the 2024 UPSC Mains General Studies GS Paper I, as printed
The question as printed in the 2024 General Studies paper
Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Model answer

Written by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the 250-word length. UPSC does not publish answers for Mains — this is one way to score well, not an official key.

The Constitution of India establishes an egalitarian framework promising social, economic, and political justice in its Preamble, reinforced through Articles 15, 16, 17, and 46. While affirmative action has created visible upward mobility for marginalized communities, significant structural and operational gaps continue to prevent these benefits from reaching the most disadvantaged.

Implementation Gaps and Structural Barriers A major impediment is the uneven distribution of benefits. Within reserved categories, an entrenched elite often corners opportunities, marginalizing the most vulnerable subgroups. Representation remains disproportionately low in the higher judiciary, senior bureaucracy, and state-funded research bodies. Moreover, with the contraction of public sector employment, affirmative action has lost leverage because the burgeoning private sector remains excluded from reservation mandates.

At the grassroots, foundational deficits severely impede social mobility. Inadequate public school infrastructure, a widening digital divide, and persistent social discrimination restrict the capacity of underprivileged youth to compete effectively, rendering formal reservations inadequate on their own.

Judicial Interventions and Mixed Impacts Judicial interpretations have shaped affirmative action with mixed outcomes. Landmark verdicts, from Indra Sawhney (1992) establishing the 50% cap and OBC creamy layer, to M. Nagaraj (2006) and Jarnail Singh (2018), introduced necessary checks. However, conditions requiring quantifiable data on inadequacy of representation and the extension of the creamy layer concept to SC/ST promotions have often resulted in bureaucratic delays and litigation.

Way Forward To realize the transformative vision of the Constitution, affirmative action must evolve beyond token representation. Policy must prioritize sub-categorization and rationalized creamy-layer norms, incentivize voluntary affirmative action in the private sector, and establish robust monitoring bodies. True equity will ultimately depend on pairing reservations with universal, high-quality foundational education and capacity building.

What "Comment" is asking you to do

Take a position on the statement and support it. Comment usually attaches to a quoted line in the short slots, so the reasoning must be compressed — an opening view, a few load-bearing reasons, and the limit of the claim.

Structure that answers it

Unpack what the statement asserts → your stance → two or three supporting reasons → the qualification that limits it

Where marks are lost

Neutral summary; a comment without a stance has not answered. Equally costly is accepting the quoted line wholesale and never testing where it fails.

All UPSC directive words, compared →

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Framework: GS1 Society: Continuity, Data, Intersectionality, Solution. comment: context > arguments both sides > judgment > close Full marks: Analyzes structural/implementation gaps with specific examples and offers a nuanced judgment.

Key points expected

  • Context: Constitutional mandate (Art 14, 15, 16) vs. current reality
  • Argument 1: Implementation gaps (creaming, lack of data, bureaucratic inertia)
  • Argument 2: Structural barriers (poor school quality, digital divide, social stigma)
  • Judgment: Affirmative action is necessary but insufficient without holistic development

Evaluation rubric

Each sub-part is marked on its own, against the marks and word limit printed on the paper.

  1. The answer Contextualize the gap between constitutional intent and ground reality, analyze structural barriers, and offer a judgment. 15 marks · 250 words

    comment— context → arguments both sides → judgment → close

    Must cover

    • Context: Constitutional mandate (Art 14, 15, 16) vs. current reality
    • Argument 1: Implementation gaps (creaming, lack of data, bureaucratic inertia)
    • Argument 2: Structural barriers (poor school quality, digital divide, social stigma)
    • Judgment: Affirmative action is necessary but insufficient without holistic development

    Loses marks

    • Emotive language without structural analysis
    • Listing schemes without evaluating their impact
    • Ignoring the 'why' behind the failure (focusing only on 'what' is missing)

    Earns more

    • Mention of specific schemes (e.g., PM-SHRI, NEP 2020) and their limits
    • Intersectionality: How caste, class, and gender compound disadvantage
    • Reference to 'creaming effect' or 'elite capture' of benefits
    • Distinction between 'access' (entry) and 'success' (outcomes)

    Extra mark

    • Citing a specific statistic (e.g., dropout rates in higher education)
    • Reference to a specific Supreme Court judgment on reservation

Practice this exact question

Write your answer and it is marked point by point against the model answer above — what you covered, what you missed, what you got wrong.

Evaluate my answer →

More from General Studies 2024 GS Paper I