Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2006 (3) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2006 (3) TMI 763 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues Involved:
1. Whether the 'Mana' community in the State of Maharashtra is a Sub-Tribe of "Gond" and is a Scheduled Tribe or not.
2. Whether the two Judge Bench decisions in Dina v. Narayan Singh (Dina I) and Dadaji alias Dina v. Sukhdeobabu & Ors. (Dina II) are over-ruled by the Constitution Bench in State of Maharashtra v. Milind Katware.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Scheduled Tribe Status of 'Mana' Community
The primary issue addressed was whether the 'Mana' community in Maharashtra qualifies as a sub-tribe of "Gond" and thus as a Scheduled Tribe. The judgment referenced Article 342 of the Constitution of India, which empowers the President to specify tribes or tribal communities as Scheduled Tribes through public notification. The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, and its amendments were examined, with particular emphasis on the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. Entry 18 of Part IX of the Schedule to the Order, as amended, lists "Mana" as a separate tribe, not as a sub-tribe of "Gond." The Court concluded that "Mana" is a distinct tribe and thus qualifies as a Scheduled Tribe independently.

Issue 2: Overruling of Dina I and Dina II by Milind Katware
The second issue was whether the decisions in Dina I and Dina II were overruled by the Constitution Bench in Milind Katware. The Court reiterated the settled principle that only Parliament has the authority to amend Presidential Orders under Articles 341 and 342. The Constitution Bench in Milind Katware explicitly stated that no inquiry or evidence is permissible to declare a tribe or sub-tribe's status if not expressly mentioned in the Presidential Orders. The judgment in Dina I, which concluded that 'Mana' is a sub-tribe of 'Gond' based on evidence, was expressly overruled by Milind Katware. Consequently, Dina II, which relied on Dina I and also considered evidence to determine the status of 'Mana,' was implicitly overruled by Milind Katware.

The Court noted that the Constitution Bench's ruling in Milind Katware established that:
1. No inquiry or evidence is permissible to decide or declare that any tribe or tribal community is included in the general name if not specifically mentioned in the Presidential Orders.
2. The Scheduled Tribes Order must be read as it is, without assuming synonymous relationships not explicitly stated.
3. Only Parliament can amend the list of Scheduled Tribes.
4. State Governments, courts, tribunals, or any other authority cannot modify or alter the list specified in the Presidential Orders.

The Court affirmed that these principles overruled the decisions in Dina I and Dina II. The High Court's quashing of the Maharashtra Government's resolutions, which treated 'Mana' as a Special Backward Class unless it established affinity with 'Gond,' was upheld. The judgment emphasized that 'Mana' is a separate tribe and a Scheduled Tribe per the amended Schedule.

Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming that 'Mana' is a separate Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra and that the decisions in Dina I and Dina II were overruled by the Constitution Bench in Milind Katware. The Court maintained that no authority other than Parliament can alter the Scheduled Tribes list, and 'Mana' is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe independently of 'Gond.'

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates