- (1.) Since the relief sought for in all the writ petition (PIL) more or less identical, with the consent of the respective counsels all these Public Interest Litigation are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order/judgment. In all these Public Interest Litigation, relief sought for, mainly pertains to redefining and rescheduling of all the Scheduled Area and for declaration of Scheduled Areas (State of Jharkhand) Order, 2007 ultra vires to the Constitution of India not being consistent with to the legal parameters and other guidelines for the establishment of scheduled areas.
(2.) The factual matrix as disclosed in the W.P.(PIL) No. 689 of 2010, in brief, is that the "Scheduled Area" as enshrined in the guidelines of the annual report of 2002 -03 was published by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India. The Government of India notified in the Gazette of India, the Scheduled Areas of the Government of Jharkhand in notifying the blocks of the respective districts vide extraordinary Gazette dated 20.2.2003 as averred in the writ application. As per the 2001 census, the population of Scheduled Tribes has been less than 50% in respective blocks/districts as averred in the writ application. As per the contention of the petitioner, the preponderance of population is the constitutional specification for declaring the Scheduled Area, but in spite of all the fact that the populations of the percentage of population being less than 20%, some of the blocks of Pakur district and East Singhbhum have been declared as Scheduled Area. It has been contended by the petitioner that the majority of population of tribals have shifted from tribal to non -tribals, since 1950 by declaring the said area as Scheduled Area would frustrate the object and purpose of Article 244 and 5th Schedule of the Constitution of India. A fresh notification dated 11.4.2007 was issued which was published in the Gazette of India whereby the aforesaid notification namely the Scheduled Areas in the State of Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, Order 2003. So far it related to State of Jharkhand, was superseded and a fresh order known as "Schedule Area", Jharkhand State, Order 2007 was notified. On this notification/order districts of Ranchi, Lohardaga, Gumla, Simdega, Latehar, East Singhbhum, West Singhbhum, Saraikela -Kharsawan, Sahibganj, Pakur, Jamtara and parts of Palamu, Garhwa and Godda districts as specified in the notification were declared as 'Scheduled Areas'. It has been contended in the supplementary affidavit dated 6.2.2011 filed on behalf of the petitioner that after 2003 notification, no survey has been carried out and there were no empirical data collected by the respondent for converting the non -schedule areas into Scheduled Areas. As per the census of 2001, district -wise tribal population in 15 districts, only district of Lohardaga, Gumla, Simdega and East Singhbhum have more than 50% of population and rest 11 districts which has been notified as Schedule Areas has less than 50% tribal population. On chart of district -wise tribal population of Jharkhand, as per the census 2001 has been annexed as Annexure -6 to the affidavit. In the writ application also the States of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Orissa have been cited where the preponderance of population has been taken as the main criteria for declaration of 'Scheduled Area' but in State of Jharkhand Scheduled Area has not been declared as per the guidelines of Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India.
(3.) In W.P.(PIL) No. 1657 of 2010, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of writ commanding upon the respondents to redefine the "Schedule Area" on the basis of the population of the people of the locality in the respective districts in the State of Jharkhand following the guidelines of the Central Government and to declare the notification as contained in Annexures -6 and 7 i.e. 11.4.2007, since the same has been brought to existence beyond the Government specification of defining Schedule Areas in the State of Jharkhand overlooking the legal parameter laid down for the purpose and for redefining the 'Schedule Areas' maintaining the theory of preponderance.;