LLM Group 4 Human Rights Law Human Rights of Disadvantaged Group Solved Question Papers with Answers - Mumbai University | munotes

This folder holds one paper, the sitting of 10 July 2026, printed on form 16705 under subject code 26922 as Paper IV of Group IV. Seven questions, attempt any four, and a last question offering four short notes of which two are to be written, so eleven items in all and 25 marks a question derived from the paper's own arithmetic.

Six of those eleven items are about a BODY rather than about a group, and that is the shape of the subject. Question 4 is the National Commission for Minorities, question 5 the National Commission for Women, and short note (d) the National Commissions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes; questions 2 and 3 and short note (b) ask what the JUDICIARY has done for tribal communities, for unorganised and bonded labour, and for children. The distinction the examiner is testing in the commission questions is constitutional against statutory: the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commissions exist under Articles 338 and 338A and have the powers of a civil court written into the Constitution itself, while the Commissions for Minorities and for Women are creatures of the Acts of 1992 and 1990 and can be altered by ordinary legislation.

Questions 1 and 6 bracket the paper and should be prepared as a pair. The first asks for the CONCEPT of a disadvantaged group and how the Constitution protects it; the last asks for the FUTURE of that protection. The material that answers both is the same: the four techniques the Constitution uses, prohibition in Articles 14 to 18, protective discrimination in Articles 15(4) to 16(6), horizontal application against private persons in Articles 15(2), 17, 23 and 24, and institutional machinery in Articles 338, 338A and 338B. What turns it into an answer to question 6 is the direction of travel, which is towards finer targeting: the creamy layer brought into the Scheduled Castes in Jarnail Singh on 26 September 2018, the economic criterion upheld in Janhit Abhiyan on 7 November 2022, and sub classification permitted by seven judges in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh on 1 August 2024.

Two of the questions print their proposition in italics and expect you to argue with it rather than agree. Question 2 asserts that the judiciary has played a significant role for tribal and indigenous communities, and question 5 that the National Commission for Women is a watchdog. Both are true and both are incomplete, and the marks are in saying where. On question 2 the counterweight is Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, (2000) 10 SCC 664, and the eviction order of 13 February 2019 that the same Court stayed a fortnight later. On question 5 it is that a watchdog is exactly what the National Commission for Women Act, 1990 created, since section 10 confines the Commission to investigating, recommending and inspecting and section 10(4) gives it civil court powers for the inquiry alone.

These are model answers prepared by munotes. They are a study aid and not official University answer keys, which the University of Mumbai does not publish.