1.AI & Copyright Law: Generative AI vs Creative Rights

 Introduction

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) reshapes modern innovation, legal questions regarding the ownership and protection of intellectual property have taken center stage. With Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and LLaMA generating text, images, and music that closely resemble human creativity, a global debate has erupted: Are these outputs violating copyright laws?

Two landmark cases in June 2025 — involving Anthropic (makers of Claude) and Meta (developers of LLaMA) — addressed this critical issue for the first time in the United States courts. While both judgments ruled in favor of the tech companies, they have not resolved the underlying constitutional, legal, and ethical issues.

This write-up explores these cases in detail, examines the state of copyright law, unpacks AI’s transformative capabilities, and reflects on how these developments will impact legal thinking in India and beyond.

 Why in News?

• On June 25 and 27, 2025, two U.S. federal court rulings in California decided the first-ever lawsuits involving AI model training and copyright infringement.
• The lawsuits were filed by authors and publishers, claiming that their books were used without consent to train generative AI models.
• The courts sided with the AI companies, saying the data usage qualified as “transformative fair use.”
• These decisions have global implications, as similar lawsuits are now being filed in India, UK, and Europe.

 What is Copyright?

Copyright is a legal right given to creators of original literary, musical, artistic, or digital works. It protects the expression of ideas (not the idea itself) and allows the owner to:

• Reproduce the work.
• Distribute it.
• Display or perform it.
• License or sell it.

In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 governs such rights. Violation of these rights is called infringement, and it can lead to civil and criminal liability.

AI vs Copyright: What’s the Debate?

Generative AI models work by:

• Scraping massive datasets from books, websites, and online sources.
• Learning from this data to generate new content.

Key Legal Questions:

1. If AI learns from copyrighted books, is it reusing someone else’s creative expression?
2. If the generated content is new but derivative, does it still violate the original creator’s rights?
3. Should creators be compensated when their content is used to train AI?

The courts are now being asked to interpret how copyright law, written in the pre-digital era, applies to AI tools that imitate creativity.

 CASE 1: Writers vs Anthropic

Background:

In August 2024, a group of 21 well-known writers — including Michael Chabon, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and George R.R. Martin — sued Anthropic, the developer of the Claude AI model.

They claimed:

• Their copyrighted books were used as training data.
• The model could produce outputs similar to their work (e.g., summaries, plotlines, even mimicry of writing style).
• This violated the essence of copyright.

Court’s Decision:

• Judge William Alsup (Senior District Judge, Northern California) ruled in favor of Anthropic.
• He said:
  • The use was “fair and transformative.”
  • Claude’s outputs were not replications, but responses based on learned patterns.
  • No “concrete proof” of direct copying of large portions of the books was found.

 CASE 2: Writers vs Meta

Background:

Thirteen authors, including Sarah Silverman, filed a lawsuit against Meta Platforms Inc., claiming their works were used to train LLaMA (Large Language Model Meta AI).

Court’s Ruling:

• Judge Vince Chhabria ruled in favor of Meta.
• The court held:
  • AI outputs did not qualify as infringing reproductions.
  • Meta’s models did not memorize or duplicate large copyrighted texts.
  • The “market harm” to original authors was not proven.

 Key Arguments from AI Companies

1. Transformative Use: The models don’t reproduce original work but learn patterns, similar to how humans learn.
2. Fair Use Doctrine: They claim protection under the fair use clause — commonly applied in education, criticism, or parody.
3. No Direct Output: Companies argue AI does not retain or republish exact phrases.
4. Global Training: Much of the training happens on servers outside national jurisdictions.

🇮🇳 The Case Against OpenAI in India

In 2024, news agency ANI and the Indian Music Industry (IMI) filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI in the Delhi High Court.

 Their Allegations:

• OpenAI used Indian newspapers, music lyrics, and articles to train ChatGPT.
• No permission or royalty was paid to Indian copyright holders.

 Court Observations:

• India has no jurisdiction, since OpenAI is a U.S.-based company.
• No direct data storage in India was proven.
• No evidence of exact copying was found.

 The case was dismissed but it highlighted India’s lack of laws to regulate AI training data.

 Other Global Cases

1. New York Times vs OpenAI:
   • Filed in U.S. federal court.
   • Claims ChatGPT used NYT articles to train its LLMs.
2. Getty Images vs Stability AI (UK):
   • Getty alleges that its stock photos were used to train the AI model without licensing.
3. Comedians, Poets, and Musicians in Europe:
   • Suing various platforms for using their content to train text and image-based models.

These lawsuits will set precedents for AI’s legal accountability worldwide.

 Legal Concepts & Doctrines

 Significance of These Rulings

1. First Legal Precedents:
   • These are the first detailed judgments globally to define how copyright law applies to AI.
   • Courts favored a flexible interpretation to accommodate technological change.
2. Big Win for Tech Firms:
   • Courts sided with Meta and Anthropic, suggesting the current legal system supports innovation.
   • Encourages AI development by shielding companies from expensive litigation.
3. Concerns for Creators:
   • Authors and musicians worry about loss of credit, royalties, and originality.
   • Lack of compensation frameworks for data used in AI training poses ethical dilemmas.
4. India Must Catch Up:

1. • India currently lacks a comprehensive AI law.
   • The 1957 Copyright Act was not designed for digital models.

There’s an urgent need for statutory updates to regulate AI-driven content creation.

2.‘Gross’ Forest Law Violations in Assam: Centre Orders Legal Action Against Top Official

 Introduction

In a striking development underscoring the growing judicial and administrative scrutiny over forest conservation in India, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has directed the Assam government to initiate legal action against M.K. Yadava, the Special Secretary (Forest) of Assam. Yadava allegedly permitted the unauthorized establishment of commando battalions in protected forest areas in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023.

This incident marks a rare and firm intervention by the Union Government against a senior Indian Forest Service officer and has stirred discussions about the enforcement of environmental laws in India. The issue is presently under scrutiny by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and is a vital current affairs topic for CLAT 2026 aspirants.

 Why in News?

• The MoEFCC’s Shillong regional office discovered that forest land in Assam had been used for constructing commando battalion camps without the necessary environmental clearances.
• Following the ministry’s findings, a directive was issued on May 29, 2025, asking the Assam government to prosecute the Special Secretary (Forest), M.K. Yadava.
• The directive cited gross violations of forest laws, particularly the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the Van Rules, 2023.

 Summary of Events

1. Unauthorized Approvals by M.K. Yadava:
   • Yadava, in his capacity as PCCF (Principal Chief Conservator of Forests) and HoFF (Head of Forest Force), had approved commando camps in Geleky (Sivasagar), Damcherra (Hailakandi), and Dima Hasao—without central government clearance.
   •  

1. • He justified these approvals on grounds of “national security”, invoking urgency due to law and order needs. However, this was found to violate forest conservation laws.
2. Contravention of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980:
   • The camps were constructed without prior approval from the central government—a mandatory requirement under Section 2 of the Act.
   • No post-facto approval was granted, nor was any attempt made to regularize the encroachments.
3. Violation of Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023:
   • These rules require:
     • Written proposals for forest diversion.
     • Submission of detailed project reports.
     • Public consultation in certain cases.
     • Legal action for non-compliance under Rule 15(2).
   • Rule 15(2) was invoked to authorize the divisional forest officer to prosecute Yadava within 45 days.
4. RTI Revelations:
   • Documents accessed under the Right to Information Act exposed that Yadava’s orders lacked procedural backing and violated principles laid down by the Supreme Court in environmental jurisprudence.
5. NGT Involvement and PILs:
   • Civil society groups filed petitions with the NGT’s Eastern Bench in Kolkata.
   • Assam-based NGO Aranya Suraksha Parishad highlighted forest encroachments under the guise of “security” as a cover for deforestation and misuse of public land.
6. Failure of Administrative Review:
   • The 2024 environment ministry’s submission had warned that actions by Yadava were not tenable under law and yet he proceeded, defying central authority and ignoring previous warnings.
   • This has been considered a case of “administrative obstinacy.”

 Legal Framework Involved

 Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

Purpose:

To regulate the use of forest land for non-forest purposes and to ensure that forest resources are not diverted without environmental clearance.

Key Provisions:

• Section 2: No forest land can be used for any non-forest purpose without prior approval of the Central Government.
• Section 3A & 3B (Post Amendment): Specify penalties and criminal liabilities for violations.
• Application: Includes all states and Union Territories; overrides any state-level permissions.

 Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023

Background:

These are the updated procedural rules under the Forest Conservation Act, which came into effect in 2023.

Key Features:

• Emphasis on transparency and ecological impact.
• Rule 8: Proposals must include a Digital Location Map and project justification.
• Rule 9: Empowers scrutiny committees to assess ecological risk before approval.
• Rule 15(2): Allows initiation of prosecution against forest officers violating the Act.
• Strengthens accountability by empowering local officers to report violations.

CLAT Insight:

These rules introduce greater enforceability, procedural rigor, and accountability, and are relevant in cases like this where an officer bypasses central norms.

 What is the National Green Tribunal (NGT)?

 Established: 2010 under the NGT Act, 2010.

 Objective:

To provide expeditious and specialized judicial remedies in environmental matters.

 Powers:

• Adjudicates matters under seven central environmental laws.
• Can penalize polluters, order demolition, restoration, or compensation.
• Decisions are binding and can only be appealed in the Supreme Court.

 Structure:

• Principal Bench: New Delhi
• Zonal Benches: Chennai, Pune, Kolkata, Bhopal
• Composed of judicial and expert members.

 Relevance in this Case:

• NGT’s Kolkata bench received a petition questioning the legality of the forest land conversion.
• Ordered a site inspection and review by a joint committee.
• Confirmed encroachments in Geleky and Damcherra, exposing violation of Rule 9 of the Van Rules.

 Analysis & Legal Jargon for CLAT Aspirants

✳ Public Trust Doctrine:

• Based on Article 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution.
• The government is considered a trustee of all natural resources and cannot allocate forest land arbitrarily.

✳ Post-Facto Approval:

• Approval granted after the act has been committed. Generally invalid in forest law due to the requirement for ex-ante clearance.

✳ Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA):

• A prerequisite for clearance involving forest or ecologically sensitive land.
• Was bypassed in this case by the official in question.

✳ Administrative Arbitrariness:

• Any executive action that is not based on reason or law is violative of Article 14 (Right to Equality).
• This forms the crux of the ministry’s case against M.K. Yadava.

 Implications of the Case

1. State vs Centre Dynamics:
   • Illustrates tensions between State Forest Departments and Central Environmental Authorities.
   • Raises constitutional questions on the division of powers under Schedule VII of the Constitution (List III – Concurrent List).
2. Strengthening of Environmental Rule of Law:
   • Reinforces the idea that even senior bureaucrats are accountable under environmental statutes.
   • Encourages civil society activism through PILs and tribunal access.
3. Administrative Accountability:

Sets a precedent for holding public servants liable for procedural violations and unauthorized land use.

3.Centre Legalizes Bike Taxis on Platforms Like Uber, Rapido: A CLAT 2026 Perspective

 Introduction

In a major policy development, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has opened the doors for the legal use of non-transport (white-plate) motorcycles as bike taxis via ride-hailing platforms such as Uber, Rapido, and Ola. On July 1, 2025, the Centre issued the Motor Vehicles Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, giving states the authority to permit or disallow the use of such vehicles for commercial purposes.

This change has important implications for public transportation, employment, urban mobility, environmental sustainability, and digital governance. For CLAT 2026 aspirants, the topic becomes vital as it involves constitutional rights, federal structure, public interest litigation, transport regulation, and contemporary administrative reforms.

 Why in News?

States like Karnataka had earlier banned bike taxis following a High Court ruling that declared the use of private vehicles for commercial purposes illegal. There has been legal uncertainty and regulatory ambiguity around their operations.

With the Centre’s new guidelines:

• States have explicit legal backing to regulate or permit bike taxi services.
• The move comes under Section 67(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
• The Centre has taken a “light-touch” approach, enabling ease of regulation for aggregators while ensuring road safety and public interest.

 What the Guidelines Say

The Motor Vehicles Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, issued on July 1, aim to:

• Recognize non-transport motorcycles as a legal mode of shared mobility.
• Allow private two-wheelers to be used for passenger journeys via ride-hailing apps.
• Reduce traffic congestion and vehicular emissions.

• Promote affordable transportation, especially in underserved or hyperlocal areas.
• Empower state governments to authorize or reject such operations based on local considerations.
• Create a revenue stream by allowing state transport departments to license and collect fees from aggregators.

The guidelines do not mandate that states must allow such services. Instead, they provide a legal pathway for states to operationalize such services if they choose.

Background: The Rise of Bike Taxis

Bike taxis emerged as a cost-effective solution for last-mile connectivity in Indian cities:

• Operate efficiently in traffic-clogged urban areas.
• Offer cheaper fares compared to cabs and autos.
• Became popular through platforms like Rapido, with over 100 million rides claimed by the company as of 2024.

However, because these services used non-commercial vehicles, questions were raised about:

• Insurance coverage in accidents.
• Legality of fare collection using private vehicles.
• Tax avoidance and absence of commercial permits.

 Legal Framework: Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

The Motor Vehicles Act is the parent legislation for all transport services in India.

🔹 Section 67(3) of the MV Act, 1988:

Allows state governments to issue directives to regulate transport services “for the purposes of ensuring road safety, passenger convenience, and promoting transport facilities.”

The Centre’s 2025 guidelines derive authority from this clause, allowing states to:

• Frame regulations for aggregators.
• Authorize private motorcycles for transport.
• Charge license fees or impose conditions (e.g., wearing helmets, insurance cover, trip limits).

This reinforces the federal principle where the Centre gives a model framework but leaves discretion with states.

 Legal and Constitutional Relevance

The new guidelines intersect with key constitutional themes relevant for CLAT:

1. Federalism

• Transport is a subject in the Concurrent List.
• States have the power to legislate under the MV Act but are now assisted with a legal framework by the Centre.
• Reflects the cooperative federalism approach.

2. Article 19(1)(g) – Right to trade or business

• Allows any citizen to engage in lawful trade, subject to reasonable restrictions.
• Banning bike taxis without clear law could be challenged as violation of fundamental rights.

3. Administrative Law

• The guidelines ensure delegated legislation with checks and balances.
• Encourages transparent regulation of aggregators through preconditions.

 Concerns and Challenges

Despite its benefits, the legalization of bike taxis has triggered several debates:

✳ 1. Safety

• Two-wheelers are inherently riskier than cars.
• Passenger helmets are often not provided or worn.

✳ 2. Insurance and Liability

• White-plate vehicles (registered for private use) may not cover commercial liability.
• Who pays in case of accidents or passenger injury?

✳ 3. Unfair Competition

• Auto-rickshaw and cab unions argue that allowing private bikes bypasses commercial license rules.
• This creates regulatory asymmetry.

✳ 4. Revenue Loss

• Governments may lose out on road taxes and commercial registration charges.
• The new model seeks to address this by allowing states to levy aggregator licensing fees.

 Policy Benefits and Opportunities

Despite challenges, legalizing bike taxis brings multiple public interest advantages:

1. Affordable Transport

• Cheaper than cabs or autos.
• Beneficial for students, low-income workers, and last-mile commuters.

2. Traffic and Emission Reduction

• Two-wheelers occupy less road space.
• Better fuel efficiency, helping reduce urban air pollution.

3. Hyperlocal Delivery

• Supports gig economy workers.
• Promotes quick e-commerce deliveries in small towns and cities.

4. Employment Boost

Bike taxis provide micro-entrepreneurship opportunities to youth.

4.India’s Calorie Inequality Shrinks: What the HCES 2023-24 Data Reveals

 Introduction

India’s economic divide has often been reflected in the food plates of its citizens. For decades, the gulf between the food consumed by the rich and poor has been glaring. But recent data suggests a gradual narrowing of that gap. The Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) 2023-24, released by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), reveals that the top 5% of consumers in India have reduced their average daily calorie intake, while the bottom 5% have increased theirs, leading to a contraction in the nutritional inequality.

For CLAT aspirants, this development provides a multidimensional case study connecting law, economics, public policy, and constitutional obligations. The data is not just about calories; it speaks to questions of social justice, right to life, and state welfare obligations — key concerns under the Indian Constitution and public administration.

 Why in News?

The HCES 2023-24 marks the first comprehensive dietary assessment since 2011-12. The survey revealed that:

• The top 5% of urban Indians consumed 3,092 kilocalories (Kcal) per day.
• The bottom 5% consumed 1,696 Kcal per day.

• The gap narrowed to 82.3%, down from 114.3% in 2022-23.
• In rural areas, the top 5% consumed 2,941 Kcal, while the bottom 5% consumed 1,688 Kcal, narrowing the difference to 74.2% from 93.9%.

This shift suggests reduced overconsumption by the wealthy and better access to nutrition for the underprivileged.

 Key Findings from HCES 2023-24

• Urban Calorie Trends:
  • Top 5%: 3,092 Kcal/day
  • Bottom 5%: 1,696 Kcal/day
• Rural Calorie Trends:
  • Top 5%: 2,941 Kcal/day
  • Bottom 5%: 1,688 Kcal/day
• Average Urban Intake: 2,240 Kcal/day
• Average Rural Intake: 2,212 Kcal/day
• Urban-rural calorie gap is narrowing.

The overall finding: India’s richest are eating slightly less, while the poorest are eating slightly more.

 Protein and Fat Intake: Important Health Indicators

Nutritional quality matters as much as quantity. The HCES also tracked protein and fat intake:

• Protein Intake:
  • Rural: 61.8 gm (2023-24), marginal dip from 61.9 gm (2022-23)
  • Urban: 63.4 gm, up from 63.2 gm
• Fat Intake:
  • Top 5% in rural areas: down from 70.5 gm to 69.8 gm
  • Bottom 5% in rural areas: up from 58 gm to 60.4 gm

This reflects a rebalancing — the rich cutting excess fat, and the poor gaining essential nutrients.

 What is the HCES?

The Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) is a nationally representative sample survey conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). It collects information on household consumption patterns, serving as a foundation for:

• Poverty estimates
• National income accounting
• Planning for subsidies and welfare

The 2023-24 survey incorporated digital tools and computer-assisted interviewing, offering more accurate and real-time data.

 Causes for the Shrinking Gap

1. Behavioral Shifts Among Rich Consumers:

• Growing health consciousness
• Rising preference for low-calorie diets
• Increased access to dietary information

2. Improved Access for the Poor:

• Better Public Distribution System (PDS) access
• Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) increasing income levels
• Expansion of midday meal schemes and nutritional programs

3. COVID-19 Impact:

• Pandemic caused lifestyle changes across classes.
• Emphasis on immunity and nutrition may have led to increased food awareness.

4. Government Interventions:

• Schemes like PM Garib Kalyan Yojana, One Nation One Ration Card, and POSHAN Abhiyaan have improved food access.
• States like Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha expanded rice and grain subsidies.

 Legal and Constitutional Relevance

India’s Constitution envisions a welfare state, with multiple Articles placing the onus on the State to ensure nutritional and food security.

✳ Article 21 – Right to Life:

Expanded by the Supreme Court to include the Right to Food. (PUCL v. Union of India, 2001)

✳ Article 47 – Directive Principle:

States must improve nutrition levels and standard of living and public health.

✳ National Food Security Act (NFSA), 2013:

• Makes access to subsidized food grains a legal right.
• Targets 75% rural and 50% urban population.

✳ Supreme Court Rulings:

In Right to Food Case (PUCL v Union of India), the SC held that food entitlements are an extension of the right to life under Article 21.

🏛️ Policy Implications

• The narrowing calorie gap justifies continued welfare subsidies.
• It shows the effectiveness of targeted delivery schemes.
• Future planning must focus on:
  • Nutritional diversity
  • Protein security
  • Reducing malnutrition, not just hunger

Moreover, it aligns with UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2: Zero Hunger.

5.Oman’s Landmark Income Tax Reform: A Paradigm Shift in the Gulf’s Economic Future

For CLAT 2026 | Curated by CLAT Gurukul

Keywords: best online coaching for CLAT, online coaching for CLAT, CLAT Current Affairs 2026, Current Affairs 2026, Oman tax reform, Persian Gulf economy, oil and gas revenue diversification, Middle East taxation

Introduction

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region, renowned for its oil wealth and tax-free economies, has long provided its citizens and expatriates a lifestyle free from income taxation. The announcement by Oman in July 2025 to implement a

5% personal income tax by 2028 marks a historical shift in the region’s fiscal policy. The new tax will primarily target high-earning foreign residents, affecting only around 1% of the population. This policy marks a significant transition in the Persian Gulf’s socio-economic landscape, signifying an intent to reduce reliance on oil revenues and enhance fiscal equity. For CLAT 2026 aspirants, this development connects to areas such as international law, economic governance, constitutional principles of equality and taxation, and regional geopolitics.

Why in News?

Oman’s recent tax reform initiative has generated global attention. The Sultanate announced that starting 2028, it will levy a 5% personal income tax on individuals earning above a specified threshold, mostly targeting high-income foreign residents. This announcement breaks with the decades-long tradition in the Persian Gulf of funding public expenditure through oil and gas revenues without imposing direct taxes on individuals. The reform is intended to promote social equity, diversify income sources, and prepare the country for a post-oil economy.

Background: Tax-Free Economy of the Gulf

For years, the Gulf nations—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman—relied on oil exports to sustain their economies. Known as ‘rentier states,’ these countries distributed oil wealth through free education, subsidized healthcare, and employment in public sectors, often in exchange for political non-engagement. The absence of taxation was a crucial part of this unwritten social contract. However, fluctuating oil prices, rising populations, and global climate initiatives have pushed these states toward economic diversification and reform.

Oman’s Economic Struggles and Reform Push

Oman, with a relatively modest hydrocarbon reserve compared to its neighbors, has been more vulnerable to oil shocks. Oil and gas revenues contribute nearly 70% of its national budget. Post-2014 oil price crashes and the COVID-19 pandemic led to rising fiscal deficits, prompting Oman to implement VAT in 2021 and now income tax. The aim is to stabilize public finances, reduce subsidies, and invest in infrastructure, tourism, and small businesses. Oman’s Vision 2040 framework emphasizes economic diversification and fiscal sustainability, and the tax reform is a crucial step in this direction.

Features of the New Tax Policy

The income tax is set at 5% and applies only to individuals crossing a specific income threshold, expected to affect primarily non-Omani, high-earning professionals. Education expenses, healthcare costs, and other critical deductions will be allowed. This structure intends to maintain competitiveness while promoting fiscal contribution from affluent segments. Importantly, the law avoids targeting the local Omani population directly, ensuring social cohesion while beginning the transition.

Regional Ripple Effects

Other Gulf countries are closely monitoring Oman’s move. Saudi Arabia, under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has already implemented VAT and subsidy cuts as part of its Vision 2030. UAE imposed a 9% corporate tax in 2023. Qatar and Bahrain have hinted at similar discussions. Oman’s decision could set a precedent for more aggressive tax reforms across the region, especially if global energy demand continues to shift toward renewables.

Pros and Cons of the Move

Pros:
– Enhances long-term fiscal stability.
– Aligns with international tax norms, improving global investment confidence.
– Supports social equity by targeting the wealthy.
– Encourages reduced reliance on state welfare and subsidies.

Cons:
– May deter foreign investment.
– Could cause an exodus of skilled foreign professionals.
– Limited immediate revenue due to narrow tax base.
– Risk of political dissatisfaction in a region used to tax-free living.

Impact on India and CLAT Relevance

India has the largest expatriate population in the GCC. Many Indian professionals in Oman may now face higher personal taxation, impacting remittances and employment choices. For CLAT aspirants, this policy is a perfect case study of:
– Taxation principles in constitutional and international law.
– Economic reasoning and policy analysis.
– Middle East geopolitics and India’s economic diplomacy.
– Comparative governance systems and fiscal management.

Legal and Economic Terms Explained

GCC – Gulf Cooperation Council: A political and economic alliance of 6 Middle Eastern countries.
Rentier State – A country that derives all or a substantial portion of its revenues from the rent of indigenous resources.
Income Tax – A direct tax levied on the income of individuals and businesses.
Diversification – The process of a country expanding its economy to reduce reliance on one sector (e.g., oil).
Expatriate – A person temporarily or permanently residing in a country other than their native country.

6.SC to Decide: Are Caste Certificate Guidelines Discriminatory for Children of Single Mothers?

 Introduction

In a landmark moment that will shape the trajectory of caste-based identity, social justice, and gender rights in India, the Supreme Court is set to examine whether the guidelines for issuing caste certificates to children of single mothers are discriminatory and violative of constitutional guarantees.

This issue arises from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenges the Revenue Department’s practice of insisting on a father’s caste certificate to determine a child’s community status under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) or Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) categories.

The case has implications not only for constitutional interpretation but also for gender equality, child rights, and the application of affirmative action. For aspirants preparing for CLAT 2026, this issue is highly relevant across Legal Reasoning, General Knowledge, and Constitutional Law segments.

 Why in News?

• A PIL has been filed challenging the Delhi Revenue Department’s practice of requiring paternal lineage for issuing caste certificates.
• The Supreme Court has agreed to examine whether this guideline violates fundamental rights of children born to single mothers.
• The issue will be heard in detail on July 22, 2025, and may bring clarity on a matter that has long affected access to education, jobs, and reservations for children raised by single mothers.

Core Issue in the Case

 What’s Being Challenged?

• The current guidelines in most Indian states require caste certification from the father or his relatives to prove eligibility for OBC/SC/ST status.
• This excludes children of single mothers, divorced women, or widows if they cannot provide paternal caste proof, thus denying them reservation benefits.

 Petitioner’s Argument:

• The petitioner claimed that this policy discriminates based on gender and parental status.
• It also violates the right to equality (Article 14) and personal liberty (Article 21) of the child.
• The plea emphasized that maternal caste identity should be legally accepted in absence of paternal linkage.

 The Legal Background: Precedents & Interpretations

 Bench Hearing the Case:

• Justices K.V. Viswanathan and K. S. R. Singh.

 Major Case Referred:

Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika v. State of Gujarat (2012)

• This landmark case held that:

• • Caste status is determined by how a child is brought up, not solely by paternal identity.
  • If a child is raised entirely by the mother who belongs to SC/ST/OBC community, the child can inherit the mother’s caste.
• However, the SC also held that such situations need strong proof, like upbringing evidence and social status documentation.

 The Argument of the State

• The state’s standing is based on presumption in law:
  • A child inherits the father’s caste as per traditional Hindu law.
  • In inter-caste marriages, the husband’s caste generally dominates, especially when the father belongs to a forward caste.
• Exception only made if:
  • The father has abandoned the child or is deceased.
  • The mother solely raises the child within her community context.

 Related High Court Rulings

1. Rumy Chowdhury v. Govt. of NCT Delhi (2019):

• Delhi High Court struck down a government guideline mandating that only the father’s caste will determine the child’s caste.
• Held that a single mother’s child can claim her caste if proof exists that:
  • The child lived and was raised in that social group.
  • The child faced similar socio-economic disadvantages.

2. 2024 Gauhati High Court:

• Upheld the validity of a junior officer’s OBC certificate issued in the name of the mother.
• Recognized that even though the father was from a general category, the child inherited disadvantages from being raised in the mother’s backward community.

 Legal Issues Before the Supreme Court

1. Does forcing children to prove paternal caste violate Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution?

1. Can caste identity be based on maternal lineage when the father is absent or non-contributory?
2. Do existing guidelines reflect outdated patriarchal assumptions?
3. Does the denial of caste certificate deprive children of their rightful reservations and educational rights?
4. What is the constitutional test for discrimination in such cases — presumption or upbringing?

 Constitutional and Legal Analysis

Article 14 – Right to Equality:

• The requirement to prove paternal caste can result in unequal treatment of similarly placed individuals.
• Especially disadvantages children raised by single mothers, widows, and abandoned women.

 Article 15 – Prohibition of Discrimination:

• Policies based on parental status (especially favoring paternal identity) may amount to indirect discrimination.

 Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty:

• Education, development, and access to opportunity are integral to dignified living.
• Caste certificate denial hinders the right to pursue education and employment for marginal communities.