The Supreme Court Wednesday ordered removal of certain remarks from a recent judgement wherein it had referred to Sikkimese-Nepalis as people of foreign origin, leading to protests in Sikkim. A bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna clarified that it was not the court's fault, but had happened as the petitioners had not brought to its notice amendments made to the initial petition that was filed. As a result, the court had relied on the first petition which bore the errors. The offending portion had appeared in the concurring judgement delivered by Justice Nagarathna. It read as: “Therefore, there was no difference made out between the original inhabitants of Sikkim, namely the Bhutia-Lepchas and the persons of foreign origin settled in Sikkim like the Nepalis or persons of Indian origin who had settled down in Sikkim generations back". The reference to Nepalis settled in Sikkim and persons of Indian origin as persons of foreign origin led to protests. Subsequently, the Centre, the state of Sikkim and some Sikkim-Nepalese people approached the top court seeking removal of the controversial phrases. Hearing the applications, the bench initially agreed to delete the portion “persons of foreign origin settled in Sikkim like the Nepalis”. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, however, urged the court to delete the entire sentence. He also requested the court to record in the order that it had not examined Article 371F which deals with special provisions with respect to the State of Sikkim. The bench, however, said this was not necessary as it had not touched on that aspect at all. It agreed to delete the portion which read as: “Namely the Bhutia Lepchas and the persons of foreign origin settled in Sikkim like the Nepalese” In its order, the court noted that the counsel for petitioners had been granted permission to file an amended writ petition. The same was filed but the amendments were not brought to the notice of the court by the counsel. “It was their duty to bring to the notice of the court. Now the Miscellaneous Application has been filed seeking corrections as if error has occurred from the point of view of the court…Having heard learned senior counsel for the respective parties, we think it is just and proper to correct certain words used in paragraph..”, the bench ordered. The matter related to the exclusion of old Indian settlers, who had permanently settled in Sikkim before the state merged with the Indian union on 26.04.1975 from the definition of “Sikkimese” in Section 10(26AAA) of Income Tax Act. The SC judgement had held that this exclusion was unconstitutional.
