Dr. B. R. Ambedkar was an incredible patriot, political mastermind, reformer and progressive and productive author with immense thouHe represented all logical and social exercises, which upgraded the reason for human advancement and bliss. His commitment reallyshape of the Constitution of India was exceptional. He resistant battled for the advancement of the mistreated classes. In his battles, he exhibited uncommon crusading soul, cutting out in the process a significant spot for himself among the conspicuous planners of present day India. He devoted as long as he can remember to challenge the cruel social request and its wrongly glorified social relations that treated the human presence of dalits as subhuman. ‘He saw obviously that the predominant moral and political downsides sprang from an all out confusion of the significance of human relationship, and the issue of right human relations was the way in to his whole idea and activity. It was in this conviction and with a hopeful confidence in human goodness, love and truth, which he entered upon his hallowed strategic. His motivation was useful instead of theoretical and his way of thinking of life was basically an advancement and development under specific conditions and occasions won in Indian culture’ (Jatava D. R. 42-43). Ambedkar’s political reasoning is contained in two of his announcements: (I) rights are ensured not by law however by the social and good inner voice of society; and (ii) a just type of government surmises a law based type of society. Social still, small voice is the main defend all things considered, key or non-central. The common view that once rights are instituted in a law is protected is ridiculous. The proper system of majority rule government is of no worth. Majority rule government is basically a type of society, a method of related living. The underlying foundations of vote based system are to be looked in the social relationship, in the terms of related life between the individuals who structure a general public. Ambedkar political majority rule government can’t last except if there lies at the base of it social popular government. Social majority rules system is a lifestyle, which perceives freedom, correspondence and brotherhood as the standards of life. These standards are not to be treated as independent things yet in a trinity. They structure an association of trinity as in to separate from one from the other is to nullify the very point of majority rule government. Except if there is social vote based system, capacity to the individuals would stay a far off dream. Social Philosophy of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Ambedkar was, second to none, a representative of the disregarded mankind ‘ the laborers, little workers and landless workers. He communicated the distresses of the untouchables and attempted truly to channel the exercises of the discouraged classes. In assembling them, he made a feeling of confidence and pride in them. He committed his life to the reason for expulsion of distance and totally distinguished himself with the socially isolated area of the Indian culture. He propelled a deep rooted campaign for freeing them from their hundreds of years old subjugation and shunning. It is this campaign, which ‘lifted him up high from a negligible ghetto kid to a living legend’. He was brought into the world a distant and in this way  Negative consequences of stratification he had an exceptional longing to see that the untouchables are better set in social, political and financial fields. He dismissed social changes got as philanthropy and convenience. He needed social changes starting at right. He was less for fringe social changes in Hindu society like widow remarriage and cancelation of you Negative consequences of stratification ngster marriage. He was for an all out re-association and remaking of the Hindu society on two primary standards fairness and nonappearance of casteism. The socially dynamic qualities that Ambedkar loved were the premise of his social and political life. Despite the fact that he was conceived in the Mahar people group, he never spoke to his own locale yet spoke to each one of those networks, which were socially and financially discouraged. He has been differently depicted as a crusader for the privileges of the discouraged classes of India, a scholarly