Matter Of Legislative Policy: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking To De-Recognize Certain Communities As Scheduled Tribes

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking to quash the enlistment of certain communities as Scheduled Tribes in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Act, 1991 & the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2020.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation Karnataka, through its President Mahendra Kumar Mitra.

The court said, “We decline indulgence in the matter inasmuch as what community needs to be enlisted as a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe is largely a matter of Legislative Policy and that the Courts cannot ordinarily intervene in the same unless the violation of constitutional provisions is demonstrated.”

The petitioner had prayed for a direction not to register cases under The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 from members of Scheduled Castes against Non-Scheduled Tribes such as Nayak, Naik, Beda, Bedar, Valmiki & Talawara.

Further, they also sought a direction to restrain the issuance of Scheduled Tribe Certificates to members belonging to aforesaid communities as well as for no benefit to be extended in terms of reservation or education, employment, election, etc. to these communities.

Petitioners sought omnibus directions which would render the aforesaid communities outside the scope of protected communities under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as well, and further to exclude these communities from the list of Scheduled Tribes.

The bench in rejecting the plea said, “It hardly needs to be stated that a host of factors enter the fray of legislative decision making in matters like this and that Courts are ill-equipped for undertaking their evaluation in writ jurisdiction.”

Relying on the Apex court decision in the case of Ram Javay Kapur vs. State Of Punjab (1955), the court has reiterated the doctrine of separation of powers in the constitutional framework.

It said “Each organ of the State has to show due deference to the decisions of coordinate organs as a constitutional imperative, in the fields earmarked for them exclusively. The law relating to reservation & concession enacted for the upliftment of downtrodden communities finds support of the constitutional provisions. It is the prerogative of the Parliament to legislate for the inclusion of the communities inter alia in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order Act or for exclusion from it. Writ Courts cannot run a race of opinions with the Parliament/Legislatures, in matters like this.”

The bench objected to the framing of the prayers by the petitioner and observed that they cannot be granted in a wholesale way which would take away their status granted to them by the Parliament.

Noting that the petitioner had structured the pleadings & prayers with a misjoinder of causes of action, prayers & parties, the Court observed that although ordinary rules of pleadings do not apply to PILs, it did not mean that distinct causes of action on which multiple prayers are sought for can be clubbed together.”

Further, it added “PIL jurisdiction is wide like a sea, is true; however, every sea has a shore, cannot be forgotten. Much is not necessary to specify and less is insufficient to leave it unsaid.”

Accordingly, it dismissed the petition.

Appearance: Mahendra Kumar Mitra, party-in-person

Additional Solicitor General Aravind Kamath a/w Senior Panel Counsel Rajashekar S FOR R1- 8;

AGA Niloufer Akbar for R10 TO 16.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 486

Case Title: Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation Karnataka AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 26836 OF 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order