Centre can146;t change SC/ST list

Against the backdrop of the ongoing quota debate, the Supreme Court has held that the Centre 8220;cannot add or subtract to the list of scheduled castes...

Against the backdrop of the ongoing quota debate, the Supreme Court has held that the Centre 8220;cannot add or subtract to the list of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes8221;. A division bench of Justices Ashok Bhan and Markandey Katju in its judgment negated the claim of a person belonging to Lohar community, an OBC, that Lohars in Bihar were actually SCs.

The bench held 8220;neither the government nor the judiciary can add or subtract to the list of SC/STs8221;, but reiterated the 8220;limited jurisdiction8221; of the courts to hold that the judiciary has jurisdiction 8220;to the extent of finding out whether the community which claims the status as SC/ST, was8230; included in the schedule concerned8221;.

8220;To that limited extent, the court would have the jurisdiction but otherwise, the court is devoid of power to include in or exclude from or substitute or declare synonyms to the SC/ST or parts thereof or group of such castes or tribes8221;, the apex court ruled.

This decision will have a bearing on the ongoing cases, especially in the challenge to OBC reservation brought by Supreme Court advocate Ashoka Kumar Thakur whose main contention is that the government has notified 8220;in excess8221; several communities as OBCs and that in several parts of the country, many higher castes have been included in the OBC/SC/ST list.

As a solution, the SC in the instant case said the courts must 8220;read the lists of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes under article 341 and 342 read with article 36624 and 25 as they find them and accept their ordinary meaning8221;.

Articles 341 and 342 prescribe the presidential notification for notifying SCs and STs and 36624 and 25 give the definition of SCs and STs. Article 366 is titled 8220;Definitions8221; including in its ambit 30 such definitions varying from 8220;agriculture income8221;, 8220;Anglo-Indian8221; to 8220;Union Territories8221;.

The court also said that English language to be the 8220;authoritative text8221; in respect of Acts of Parliament. This came over an argument advanced that after the Official Languages Act, 1963, the Hindi version would prevail in case of ambiguity between Hindi and English versions. This argument was advanced to buttress the point that Hindi version of the meaning for 8220;Lohar8221; community should be taken for its inclusion in the SC list.