38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 22, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

State govt has got no power to tinker with list of Scheduled Castes: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]

By Jhanak Sharma      17 July, 2024 09:31 AM      0 Comments
State govt has got no power to tinker with list of Scheduled Castes Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said that a state government has no competence or authority or power to tinker with the lists of Scheduled Castes published under Article 341 of the Constitution.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prashant Kumar Mishra said, "Any inclusion or exclusion of any caste, race or tribe or part of or group within the castes, races or tribes has to be, by law made by the Parliament, and not by any other mode or manner."

The top court quashed a resolution of July 01, 2015 issued by the Bihar government stating that an extremely backward caste "Tanti-Tantwa” be merged in the Scheduled Castes list with the caste 'Pan/Sawasi'.

The court termed the state government's decision as "patently illegal, and erroneous".

"In the present case, the action of the State is found to be mala fide and de hors the constitutional provisions. The State cannot be pardoned for the mischief done by it. Depriving the members of the Scheduled Castes covered by the lists under Article 341 of the Constitution is a serious issue," the court said, using the strong words.

Citing Article 341 of the Constitution, the bench said from a plain reading of the Article and in particular sub-Clause 2, two things are clear – first, the list specified under the notification under Clause-1 can be amended, altered only by law made by Parliament.

Secondly, it prohibits that but for a law made by Parliament a notification issued under sub-Clause-1 cannot be varied by any subsequent notification, the court pointed out.

Also Read: Why selective public interest to probe encounters only in Gujarat, State govt to SC

The court also noted that the Article does not deal with merely castes, races or tribes but also parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes.

"Therefore, if any change is to be made with respect to inclusion or exclusion not only of any caste, race or tribe but also of a part of or group within any of the caste, race or tribe the same has to be done by law made by the Parliament," the bench said.

On appeals filed by Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar, Patna and Ashish Rajak, the apex court set aside the Patna High Court's order of April 3, 2017, which had dismissed the plea challenging validity of the 2015 notification.

The court said, "Any person not deserving and not covered by such list if extended such benefit for deliberate and mischievous reasons by the State, cannot take away the benefit of the members of the Scheduled Castes. Such appointments would under law on the findings recorded would be liable to be set aside."

The court directed the state government to return the SC quota posts on which appointments of Tanti-Tantwa community have been made and they should be reverted back to Extremely Backward Classes.

The Bihar government, on its part, sought to justify its action, contending the State has only acted on the recommendation of the State Commission for Extremely Backward Classes of February 02, 2015 and, as such, no fault can be found with the resolution of the State. It referred to socio historical factors and other statutory provisions considered by the Commission while making the recommendation.

The court, however, said the submission that resolution was only clarificatory is not worth considering for a moment and deserves outright rejection.

"The State knew very well that it had no authority and had accordingly forwarded its request to the Union of India in the year 2011. The said request was not accepted and returned for further comments or justification or review. Ignoring the same, the State proceeded to issue the Circular dated 01.07.2015," it said.

The court found the state government's act as "nothing short of mala fide exercise for whatever good, bad or indifferent reasons, the State may have thought at that moment". 

 

[Read Judgement]



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

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS

us-sc-strikes-down-trumps-global-tariffs-rules-ieepa-does-not-authorize-president-to-impose-duties
Trending International
US SC Strikes Down Trump’s Global Tariffs, Rules IEEPA Does Not Authorize President to Impose Duties [Read Order]

US Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s global tariffs, ruling that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose import duties.

21 February, 2026 02:45 PM
kerala-hc-issues-notice-to-cbfc-over-certification-of-the-kerala-story-2-goes-beyond
Trending Judiciary
Kerala HC Issues Notice to CBFC Over Certification of ‘The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond’

Kerala High Court issues notice to CBFC over certification of The Kerala Story 2, questions safeguards under Cinematograph Act; release not stayed.

21 February, 2026 02:50 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-declines-to-entertain-plea-over-alleged-anti-muslim-remarks-by-assam-cm-says-approach-hc
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines to Entertain Plea Over Alleged Anti-Muslim Remarks by Assam CM, Says Approach HC

Supreme Court asks petitioners to approach Gauhati High Court over alleged hate speech by Assam CM, declines plea for FIRs and SIT probe.

16 February, 2026 02:52 PM
can-live-in-partner-be-prosecuted-under-section-498a-ipc-sc-to-decide-scope-of-husband-in-cruelty-law
Trending Judiciary
Can Live-In Partner Be Prosecuted Under Section 498A IPC? SC To Decide Scope Of ‘Husband’ In Cruelty Law [Read Order]

Supreme Court to decide if a man in a live-in relationship can be prosecuted under Section 498A IPC for cruelty. Case to impact scope of “husband”.

16 February, 2026 03:33 PM
sc-sets-aside-anticipatory-bail-granted-to-absconding-murder-accused-in-madhya-pradesh-political-rivalry-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Sets Aside Anticipatory Bail Granted To Absconding Murder Accused In Madhya Pradesh Political Rivalry Case [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court sets aside anticipatory bail to absconding murder accused in MP political rivalry case, calls HC order perverse and unjustified.

16 February, 2026 03:59 PM
places-of-worship-act-does-not-protect-illegal-encroachments-on-government-land-madras-hc
Trending Judiciary
Places of Worship Act Does Not Protect Illegal Encroachments on Government Land: Madras HC [Read Order]

Madras High Court rules that Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not protect temples built on encroached government land; eviction upheld in Ramanathapuram case.

16 February, 2026 04:18 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email