Atrocities In Employment And Education
🔹 What Are Atrocities in Employment and Education?
"Atrocities" in this context refer to systemic discrimination, exclusion, and violence faced by individuals—particularly from Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)—within the spheres of employment and education, violating their fundamental and legal rights.
Such atrocities include:
Denial of promotions or job opportunities on caste basis
Harassment, humiliation, or exclusion of SC/ST employees or students
Segregation or abuse in hostels, classrooms, or canteens
Institutional negligence leading to suicide or mental trauma
Violation of reservation policies
📜 Legal Framework
| Law | Protection Offered |
|---|---|
| Constitution of India | Articles 15, 16, 17, 21, and 46 prohibit discrimination and ensure equal opportunity |
| SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 | Criminalizes caste-based atrocities in all walks of life, including workplace and education |
| Right to Education Act, 2009 | Mandates inclusive, non-discriminatory education |
| UGC Guidelines | Protect students from caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions |
| Reservation Laws | Mandate reservation in public employment and education for SCs/STs/OBCs |
⚖️ Important Case Laws – More Than Five Detailed
1. Rohith Vemula Case (2016) – Hyderabad Central University
Facts:
Rohith Vemula, a Dalit PhD scholar, was suspended and later died by suicide. Allegations included caste-based harassment and institutional negligence.
Issues:
Discrimination in academic and hostel access
Mental harassment
Violation of Article 21 (Right to Life with dignity)
Observations:
Although the case is ongoing, it sparked nationwide protests and prompted the UGC to issue guidelines against caste discrimination in universities.
Importance:
Highlighted institutional casteism in higher education. Brought focus on universities’ obligation to protect dignity and mental health of marginalized students.
2. Indian Institute of Technology v. Dr. V.P. Singh (2000) – CAT Delhi
Facts:
A Dalit professor was denied promotion despite being qualified. Alleged caste discrimination.
Held:
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) found that his rejection was not based on merit but rooted in bias, and ordered reconsideration of his promotion.
Importance:
Established that objective criteria must be applied in employment decisions; subjective bias violates Article 16 (equality in public employment).
3. Dr. K.R. Narayanan v. Union of India (2005)
Facts:
Dr. Narayanan, a qualified Dalit doctor, was repeatedly denied promotion in a government medical institution.
Held:
Delhi High Court held that denial of promotion despite eligibility was prima facie discriminatory, especially when others with similar credentials were promoted.
Importance:
Reinforced that promotions cannot be denied arbitrarily and affirmative action must be respected.
4. Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India (2016)
Context:
While primarily focused on drought relief, the Supreme Court noted that Dalit students and staff were often the first to be removed or affected in budgetary cuts in state educational schemes.
Importance:
Acknowledged structural inequality in education funding and policy decisions, indirectly reinforcing the need for protected rights and budgets for marginalized communities.
5. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon (1975) – Supreme Court
Facts:
Challenge to reservation of seats for SC/ST/OBC in medical colleges.
Held:
The Supreme Court upheld reservation policies, recognizing that historic and social disadvantages made such affirmative action necessary.
Importance:
Laid constitutional foundation for reservations in education to correct systemic atrocities and exclusion.
6. Bir Singh v. Delhi Jal Board (2018) – Supreme Court
Facts:
Non-regular SC/ST employees challenged denial of regularization.
Held:
Court recognized that the denial of regularization where others were regularized could be discriminatory, and such policies must align with Articles 14, 15, and 16.
Importance:
Protects lower-grade SC/ST employees from exploitative employment practices, especially contractual discrimination.
7. Chandru v. State of Tamil Nadu (1985) – Madras High Court
Facts:
A Dalit student was forced to sit separately in class and denied access to common hostel and canteen facilities.
Held:
Court ruled this was a clear violation of Article 15(2) and punishable under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Importance:
Early case that established educational segregation as an atrocity and mandated inclusive treatment in educational institutions.
8. Jitendra Singh v. Ministry of Railways (2012) – CAT
Facts:
SC employee denied consideration for departmental promotion despite having better merit.
Held:
Tribunal found that the department selectively applied rules, and this amounted to discriminatory denial of opportunity.
Importance:
Shows how administrative discrimination can be challenged legally and remedied.
🧩 Forms of Atrocities in Education and Employment
| Area | Examples of Atrocities |
|---|---|
| Employment | Denial of promotion, isolation, forced resignation, harassment, tokenism |
| Education | Caste-based seating, denial of hostels, lack of mentorship, verbal abuse, failing students based on prejudice |
| Administration | Ignoring complaints of caste bias, failing to act on discrimination, biased internal committees |
| Policy | Budget cuts to schemes for SC/ST, violation of reservation policy, non-implementation of scholarships |
🛑 SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act – Application
The Act criminalizes:
Denial of employment or education benefits
Verbal and physical abuse based on caste
Discrimination in promotions or academic assessments
Social boycotts or harassment within institutions
✅ Conclusion
Atrocities in employment and education against marginalized communities are not just social wrongs but legal violations of constitutional and statutory rights. Courts have consistently recognized:
The importance of equal opportunity
The illegality of caste-based exclusion or discrimination
The duty of institutions to create inclusive environments
Legal remedies exist through constitutional petitions, tribunals, and criminal prosecution under the Atrocities Act. However, proactive enforcement, social awareness, and accountability within institutions remain key.
RELATED Blog
0 comments