2006 (2) TMI 710 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of Scheduled Tribe certificate issued to the appellant.
2. Whether the appellant, born to a tribal mother and non-tribal father, can claim Scheduled Tribe status.
3. Compliance with principles of natural justice during the inquiry process.
4. Interpretation and applicability of government circulars regarding the status of children from mixed marriages.
5. Impact of obtaining benefits through false caste certificates.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Scheduled Tribe Certificate Issued to the Appellant:
The appellant was issued a Scheduled Tribe certificate on 7th August 1992 by the S.D.M., Gaya, based on his mother's tribal status. However, the Union of India contested this on the grounds that the appellant was not brought up in a tribal environment and his father was non-tribal. The inquiry conducted by the Additional District Collector, Jaispurnagar, District Raigarh, Madhya Pradesh, concluded against the appellant, leading to the dismissal of his application by the Central Administrative Tribunal and subsequent appeals.

2. Scheduled Tribe Status of Appellant Born to Tribal Mother and Non-Tribal Father:
The court examined whether the appellant, born to a tribal mother and a non-tribal father, could claim Scheduled Tribe status. It was determined that the appellant, brought up in a non-tribal environment, did not suffer the disabilities associated with Scheduled Tribes. The court emphasized that the condition precedent for granting a tribe certificate is suffering from social, economic, and educational disabilities. The appellant, having been raised in a forward community, did not meet these criteria.

3. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice During Inquiry:
The appellant argued that the inquiry was conducted behind his back, violating the principles of natural justice. However, the court found that the appellant's claims of visiting the village during holidays did not equate to being accepted by the tribal community. The court upheld the inquiry report and the decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court, dismissing the appellant's claims.

4. Interpretation and Applicability of Government Circulars:
The appellant referred to a Circular dated 4th March 1975, which stated that children from a marriage between a Scheduled Tribe woman and a non-Scheduled Tribe man might be treated as members of the Scheduled Tribe if the marriage is accepted by the community. The court, however, noted that such circulars are not law within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution and do not override constitutional provisions. The court also highlighted that the appellant's parents' court marriage outside the village indicated a lack of acceptance by the tribal community.

5. Impact of Obtaining Benefits Through False Caste Certificates:
The court reiterated the principle that obtaining benefits through false caste certificates is a fraud on the Constitution. Citing previous judgments, the court emphasized that such actions deprive genuine candidates of their rightful opportunities and violate constitutional mandates. The court quashed the appellant's tribal certificate, stating that the appellant, not suffering from the disabilities of Scheduled Tribes, was not entitled to the certificate.

Conclusion:
The appeal was dismissed with costs. The court held that the appellant, born to a tribal mother and non-tribal father and raised in a non-tribal environment, could not claim Scheduled Tribe status. The tribal certificate issued to the appellant was quashed, and the court emphasized the importance of ensuring that only those genuinely suffering from social, economic, and educational disabilities are granted such certificates.