Emerging Threat For “Original” Lists Of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes Published Under Article 341 Of Constitution

The Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed the government order holding In the meanwhile, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of State of Maharashtra v. Milind and others 2001 SCC 4 and E.V.Chinnaiah v. State of A.P. The five judges' bench of the Supreme Court again affirms in the case of State of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors, that “The laudable object of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India is to provide additional protection to the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes having regard to social and educational backwardness from which they have been suffering since a considerable length of time. It is not for the executive Government but for the Court to interpret the rules and construe as to whether a particular caste or a tribe or a part or section thereof is entitled to claim the status of Scheduled Tribes.” Thus, there is a settled position of law and as law laid down by the Supreme Court of India in the cases of Bhaiyalal v. Harikishan Singh, B. Basavalingappa v. D. Munichinnappa, Nityanand Sharma v. State of Bihar, State of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors,, SUNK KUMAR RAI & ORS. Such appointments would under law on the findings recorded would be liable to be set aside.” Thus, the Supreme Court of India also stated the following: “directed be returned to the Scheduled Castes Quota and all such members of the “Tanti-Tantwa” community, who have been extended such benefit may be accommodated under their original category of Extremely Backward Classes, for which the State may take appropriate measures.” However, the case of K. Nirmala v. Canara Bank, 2024 INSC 634, wherein the illegal certificate holders were granted protection despite the State Government notification treating them as members belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe was withdrawn by the State Government after the decision of the Supreme exercising equity jurisdiction stands on a different footing and they can be distinguished on facts. In such a situation where the rights of genuine members of reserved groups or communities are liable to be affected detrimentally, government circulars or resolutions cannot operate to their detriment.” Furthermore, this Hon'ble Court finally concluded and held that: “Though the power of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution is a constitutional power vested in the court for rendering complete justice and is a power which is couched in wide terms, the exercise of the jurisdiction must have due regard to legislative mandate, where law such as Maharashtra Act 23 of 2001 holds the field.” Thus, these problems can't be cured under article 141 of constitution of India.