Supreme Court Restores Plea In Gauhati HC Which Challenges Sub-classification Of STs As Mizos & Non-Mizos In Mizoram

The Supreme Court on Monday set aside an order of the Gauhati High Court which dismissed a petition challenging the sub-classification within the Scheduled Tribes in Mizoram. The Court restored the petition to the High Court. 

The bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra was hearing a petition filed by the Mizoram Chakma Students Union who had challenged a notification issued by the State in 2021 which sub-classified scheduled tribes of Mizoram into the majority Zo (Mizo) tribe for whom 93% of seats were reserved, and Non-Mizos comprising Chakmas and communities residing permanently in Mizoram for whom 1% of seats were reserved.

The petitioners argued that the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in E. V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2005) had declared that sub-classification of SC/STs was impermissible. However, in the State of Punjab vs Davinder Singh (2020), another Constitution Bench referred the matter to a 7-judge bench. On this ground, the Guwahati High Court dismissed the petitioners' plea. The petitioners submitted that the High Court was in the wrong in rejecting their plea merely on ground that Chinnaiah judgement was being referred to larger bench.

On this submission, the Supreme Court held that the High Court should not to have dismissed the plea merely because a reference was pending before a 7-judge bench. Accordingly, the court stated–

"We allow the appeal and set aside the Division Bench order. The proceedings stand restored before the High Court."

During the hearing, the State submitted that as regards NEET 2023, a provisional merit list had been created in terms of which the three candidates who were Chakma students would be granted a provisional admission. The State's counsel submitted that this can assuage the grievance of the petitioners. Therefore, the court held that for the purposes of NEET 2023, the present arrangement submitted by the State shall continue.

Through the petition, the petitioners submitted that 93 % of seats for higher technical education had been exclusively reserved for Zo ethnic tribe or the majority Mizos. On the other hand, a mere 1 % of seats had been designated for (Non-zo) residents of the State of Mizoram who are socially and educationally backward. The petitioners challenged the notification providing for such classification as being violative of Articles 14, 15, 16( 4) and 21 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi and Advocate-on-Record Vikram Hegde. The State was represented by Advocate Bansuri Swaraj.

Case Title: Mizoram Chakma Students Union And Anr. v. The State Of Mizoram And Anr SLP(C) No. 14073/2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order