Decided on December 07,1995



- (1.)The question that is posed for consideration in the instant case is as to whether a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe would lose the benefit of that caste or tribe would lose the benefit of that caste or tribe on migration to another State, even if that State recognises the caste or tribe of that member as the one belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
(2.)In the instant case, petitioner belonged to Kanyakumari District in the State of Tamil Nadu and was married to one P.O. Darmaraj on 19.1.1989, who is a native of Kerala. She applied for the post of Dairy Extension Officer in pursuance to a notification dated 15.3.1991 issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission. In her application, she claimed her community as Hindu Sambava. As per the information furnished in column 12 of the application, she belongs to the State of Tamil Nadu. As the selection pertained to the Special Recruitment from among SC/ST candidates, a person belonging to any State other than the State of Kerala, is not eligible for the benefit of community of appointment in the State. She was therefore not eligible to apply for the post in response to the notification dated 15.3.1991. Her application was rejected by the Public Service Commission. The Commission again notified the post on 17.1.1992 which was a selection meant for SC/ST candidates in accordance with R.17A of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules. Petitioner submitted her application dated 21.12.1992. In column 7, she stated that she belongs to Kerala State, Since the details furnished by the petitioner in the applications dated 17.4.1991 and 21.12.1992 were contradictory, the Commission in their letter dated 7.6.1993 directed her to explain the circumstances under which contradictory claims were made in two of her applications. Against the said notice, she filed an appeal and requested that she may be treated as belonging to the State of Kerala since she got married to a person of Kerala State and she is permanently settled down in Kerala. She produced a certificate from the Tahsildar to show that she belonged to Tamil Nadu by birth but is residing in Kerala along with her husband since 19.1.1989. Appeal submitted by the petitioner was, however, rejected by the Commission by order dated 16.8.1993 stating that she is not entitled to get the benefit of the community.
(3.)The main question involved in this case is as to whether the denial of the benefit of community in the State of Kerala on the ground that petitioner belonged originally to the State of Tamil Nadu is legally correct or not. In Part XVI of the Constitution special provisions relating to certain classes including Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes have been made. Under Art.341 of the Constitution of India, the President may with respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a State after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of the Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be. Art.342 deals with Scheduled Tribes. Clause (2) of Art.341 empowers Parliament to include or exclude by law from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification issued under clause (1) any caste, race or tribe or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe. The power of the President is limited to specifying the castes or tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or Union Territory, as the case may be. Once a notification is issued under clause (1) of Art.341 and 342 of the Constitution, Parliament can by law include nor exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification any caste or tribe but save for that limited purpose the notification issued under clause (1) shall not be varied by any subsequent notification. It is therefore evident that the castes or tribes have to be specified in relation to a given State or Union Territory

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.