Which one of the following statements is NOT correct?

Correct option is A

The statement that is NOT correct is (a) The reservation in employment to public services can never exceed fifty per cent.

Explanation

For a long time, the 50% limit (established in the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992 case) was considered a fixed ceiling. However, recent legal developments have changed this:

• The 103rd Amendment (2019): This amendment introduced a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in addition to the existing 50% reservation for SC, ST, and OBC. This effectively pushed the total central reservation to 59.5%.
• Supreme Court Verdict (Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India, 2022): The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 103rd Amendment. The majority (3:2) ruled that the 50% ceiling is not an absolute or inflexible rule and specifically applies to the "socially and educationally backward classes" (Articles 15(4) and 16(4)). The EWS quota, falling under different clauses (15(6) and 16(6)), is allowed to exceed this cap.

Analysis of Other Options

• (b) There can be discrimination based on religion with other factors: This is a correct statement. Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion only. If religion is combined with other factors (like residence, education, or economic status), it can form a valid basis for classification. For example, specific educational schemes for minorities or the appointment of certain officials in religious institutions is constitutionally permissible.
• (c) One person can form a class by itself for discriminatory treatment: This is a correct legal principle. In the landmark case Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that a single individual (or a single company) can constitute a "class by itself" if there are special circumstances or reasons applicable to that individual which are not applicable to others.
• (d) The concept of creamy layer has been kept in mind under the Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019: This is technically correct in its practical application. While the term "creamy layer" is legally specific to OBCs, the EWS criteria effectively function similarly by setting an income ceiling (currently ₹8 lakh per annum). Those above this threshold are excluded, ensuring the benefits do not go to the "affluent" among the general category.