I also think more inclusive labor laws and labor representatives on boards would be good steps.

Now you’re talking about putting on people based on how rich they are or aren’t. Commented [O1]: See the India criteria

But what legal right does the government have to tell the private sector whom to hire or whom
to put in management or whom to put on its boards?
How can the government set quotas for a corporate board, even if it is a publicly traded
company? I would probably support tying incentives or tax breaks or other government
assistance programs to requirements for diversity.
the bill’s quota of at least one female board member will become a ceiling at a lot of firms, not
a floor.
While quotas may add a handful of women to corporate boards, they come at the expense of
the broader goal of equality — which requires not equal numbers, but equal dignity for women. Commented [O2]: They might get appointment but not the
confidence, self-respect as they did not come in the board
with capability but with quota.

Apply the theory of Aristotle we must define rights in accordance with the purpose of the
institution and it is wrong to dilute this purpose. Accordingly, what is due to someone must be
given to him. It is an insult to the talent of a person if he deserves a position in an institution
which values such talents, but is not given this position. The Indian conception of reservation
focuses on strengthening individuals. Thus, in the process of strengthening individuals,
reservation does harm to the purpose for which the institution is created. According to this
theory, therefore, reservation cannot be justified.
Specific reasons of failure of such policy in INDIA
1. given that India has the third highest number of publicly listed family-owned
companies, there is a high incidence of tokenism where female family members have
been appointed as directors. While there is no official data regarding the same since
these figures are not required to be reported by the Securities and Exchange Board of
India.1
2. the lack of policies that widen the talent pool and the absence of measures to retain
women at higher levels of the corporate structure mean that there is a grave lack of top-
level women managers. As a result, most companies have struggled to find sufficiently
qualified women to appoint. The official figures presented by the Minister of Corporate
Affairs show that nearly 21% of the companies have not appointed a woman director
India must take urgent steps to correct the deficiencies in its current law. The quota must be
accompanied by mandatory disclosures that restrict companies from appointing female family
members and paying lip service to the law, policies that ensure diversity at all levels resulting
in a substantial talent pool for appointment of women directors
Only such provisions can be made in favour of women under Art 15(3) as are reasonable and
which do not altogether obliterate or make illusory the constitutional guarantee mentioned
under 15(2).2

1
Oxford human rights club, a gobal perspective on human rights available at https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/indias-one-
woman-quota-on-board-of-directors-fails-to-bring-about-gender-equality/
2
MP jain, page 937