38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, September 20, 2024
Judiciary

Plea filed in SC for review of Aug 1 judgment on sub classification of SC/STs

By Jhanak Singh      22 August, 2024 01:42 PM      0 Comments
Plea filed in SC for review of Aug 1 judgment on sub classification of SC STs

NEW DELHI: A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court for review of its August 1, 2024 judgment that allowed the States to sub classify Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to provide preferential treatment to the disadvantaged groups among them in government jobs and education.

Mumbai-based Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil filed the review petition claiming the States not empowered to carry out such an exercise, since the powers are exclusively vested with the President under Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution to identify the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

The plea said States cannot use their power to reserve seats under Article 15 (4) and 16 (4) of the Constitution for imperial inquiry to upset the list made by the President and this violates Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution.

"If any community has advanced or ceased to be a part of Scheduled Castes or Tribes, the Parliament has got the exclusive power to include in or exclude from such community from the 1950 Order. The concurrent exercise is not contemplated by the States," the petition said.

The petition contended when this court in Indra Sawhney (1992) held that the backward classes can be further sub divided, it meant the Other Backward Classes or the SEBCs and not the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

"The power to deal with the 1950's Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders is not available to anyone, the Union Government or the State (including State Legislature) except the Parliament. Indra Sawhney didn't deal with the sub-division or sub classification of SC/ST and it remain limited to the OBCs," the plea said.

It also said the question of sub classification and exclusion of creamy layer is a question of identification of a backward class and power to identify the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is not available to the States by implication of Article 341 and 342 and more specifically due to prohibition contained under clause 2 of those Articles.

The plea also stated even if the phrase, "backward classes" in Article 16(4) is construed to be including the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes,  it will not allow the State to apply the test of backwardness on the SC/STs as they are already defined on the relevant criteria of identification and except untouchability, backwardness of any kind was never a test of their identification.

"Therefore, to further classify them on the criteria other that historic criteria of untouchability will not be permissible. Also, any classification of the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes included in the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, Order, 1950 is not permissible," it said.

The plea said the question of sub-classification is essentially a question of identification as held by this court in Indra Sawhney. For this reason alone, the State has no competence while dealing the SC/STs under Article 16(4) or 15(4) of the Constitution, it asserted.

The petition also contended the question of "creamy layer" was not before this court and the only question was whether the E V Chinnaiah required reconsideration.

"Hence any direction to exclude the creamy layer from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is patently illegal. Also, the said direction runs counter to the Indra Sawhney judgment of the Supreme Court," the plea said.

The petition also said the Constitution doesn't carve out any exception for reservation or affirmative action to Article 15 (1) and 16 (2) of the Constitution except the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of People or the Backward Class of Citizens and hence a new group which will be a collection of caste will not be permissible because that group will not be Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of people or the Backward Class of citizens.

On August 1, 2024, the Supreme Court has held sub-classification of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is constitutionally permissible. It also approved of applying the principle of creamy layer among the SC/STs.



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

The Orissa High Court has been without a permanent chief justice since January 5, 2020 after the retirement of former Chief Justice, KS Jhaveri. The high court is currently headed by acting Chief Justice Sanju Panda.

TRENDING NEWS

delhi-hc-orders-mcd-to-pay-10-lakh-compensation-in-minors-death-case
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC orders MCD to pay ₹10 Lakh compensation in minor's death case [Read Judgment]

Delhi HC directs MCD to pay ₹10 lakh for a minor's death due to negligence, applying res ipsa loquitur and affirming compensation for fundamental rights violations.

19 September, 2024 10:36 AM
sc-orders-release-of-convict-on-personal-bond-cites-injustice-in-denying-bail-due-to-inability-to-furnish-local-surety
Trending Judiciary
SC orders release of convict on Personal Bond, cites injustice in denying bail due to inability to furnish Local Surety [Read Order]

SC: Justice delivery mechanism must consider plight of indigent convicts unable to furnish local surety, orders release of convict on personal bond.

19 September, 2024 11:05 AM

TOP STORIES

rajasthan-hc-orders-10-year-passport-for-undertrial-in-matrimonial-dispute-cites-right-to-livelihood
Trending Judiciary
Rajasthan HC orders 10-year passport for undertrial in matrimonial dispute, cites right to livelihood [Read Order]

Rajasthan HC directs issuance of a 10-year passport to an undertrial in a matrimonial dispute, upholding the right to livelihood despite ongoing legal proceedings.

14 September, 2024 05:04 PM
himachal-pradesh-hc-clarifies-the-scope-of-section-482-crpc-in-compoundable-offences
Trending Judiciary
Himachal Pradesh HC clarifies the scope of Section 482 CrPC in compoundable offences [Read Order]

Himachal Pradesh HC clarifies that Section 482 CrPC cannot be invoked for compoundable offences when an alternative remedy under Section 320(1) is available.

14 September, 2024 05:36 PM
sc-bars-kejriwal-from-commenting-on-cbi-case-in-liquor-policy
Trending Judiciary
SC bars Kejriwal from commenting on CBI case in liquor policy

SC restrains Kejriwal from commenting on CBI case in liquor policy, grants bail with conditions, prohibiting visits to CM office and signing files.

16 September, 2024 10:33 AM
sc-rejects-plea-to-re-appear-in-neet-ug-for-not-being-allowed-to-carry-handkerchief
Trending Judiciary
SC rejects plea to re-appear in NEET UG for not being allowed to carry handkerchief [Read Judgment]

SC dismisses NEET UG candidate's plea to reappear due to a handkerchief ban, citing no significant impact on performance from hyperhidrosis during the exam.

16 September, 2024 10:37 AM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email