- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) In Marri Chandrashekhar Rao v. Seth G.S. Medical College and Others, 1990 3 SCC 130 a Constitution Bench of this Court was considering whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe in the State of his origin can claim the benefit of reservation upon his migration to another State. Answering the question in the negative, this Court held that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes belonging to a particular area has to be given protection so long as and to the extent they are entitled in order to become equal with others. But equally those who go to other areas shall also ensure that they make way for the disadvantaged and disabled of that part of the community who suffer from disabilities in those areas. The Court declared that the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates say from Andhra Pradesh would require necessary protection as balanced between other communities. But equally the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of say the State of Maharashtra would require protection in the State of Maharashtra to balance the other communities in that State. Upholding Circular dated 22.03.1977 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, this Court held that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who migrate from the State of their origin to some other States in search of education and employment etc. will be deemed to be Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates of the State of their origin and will be entitled to derive benefits of reservation only from the State of their origin and not from the State to which they have migrated.
(3.) Another Constitution Bench of this Court in Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. U.O.I, 1994 5 SCC 244 examined the legality of Government of India Communication dated 22.03.1977 where under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes persons who migrated from the State of their origin to another State in search of employment or for educational purpose or the like were held not entitled to the benefits of reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State to which they have migrated cannot be benefited in the later State even when they belong to a caste which is included in the Presidential Order as applicable to both the States. Upholding the validity of the communication this Court observed: "On a plain reading of clause(1) of Article 341 and 342 it is manifest that the power of the President is limited to specifying the castes of tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State of a Union Territory, as the case may be. Once a notification is issued under clause(1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, Parliament can by law include in or 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. The castes or tribes have to be specified in relation to a given State of Union Territory. That means a given caste or tribe can be a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to the State or Union Territory for which it is specified. Considerations for specifying a particular caste or tribe or class for inclusion in the list of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or backward classes in a given State would depend on the nature and extent of disadvantages and social hardships suffered by that caste, tribe or class in that State which may be totally non est in another State to which persons belonging thereto may migrate. Coincidentally it may be that a caste or tribe bearing the same nomenclature is specified in two States but the considerations on the basis of which they have been specified may be totally different. So also the degree of disadvantages of various elements which constitute the input for specification may also be totally different. Therefore, merely because a given caste is specified in State A as a Scheduled Caste does not necessarily mean that if there be another caste bearing the same nomenclature in another State the person belonging to the former would be entitled to the rights, privileges and benefits admissible to a member of the Scheduled Caste of the latter state "for the purposes of this Constitution". This is an aspect which has to be kept in mind and which was very much in the minds of the constitution-makers as is evident from the choice of language of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.";