# Poonam Gour v. State of U.P. and Ors

- **Citation:** (2014) 1 ILRA 36
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2013-12-19
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 47279 of 2012
- **Bench:** V.K. Shukla, Suneet Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/poonam-gour-v-state-of-u-p-and-ors-42922
- **Pages:** 20

## Headnote

Constitution
of
India,
Art.-226-Caste
certificate-petitioner
after
competing
M.B.B.S.-get admitted in M.S. course under
sc/st category-alleging herself to 'Gond'-as
per direction of Court earlier matter
referred to govt.-Distt. level committee as
well as state level committee-without
affording opportunity of hearing-held-
'Gond'-
as
kahar-the
backward
class
pursuance to direction of court appeared
final examination but result not declaredin view of law laid down by Apex Court in
State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind case
direction for declaration of result-given
issued ignoring caste certificate-subject to
outcome of decision of state level caste
security committee.

## Text

_Characters 0–39,994 of 70,292. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39994 for what follows._

36 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
namely, "matter relating to an offence not
compoundable in law".

26. Thus, where a dispute which is an
offence, but is compoundable can be
entertained by the Permanent Lok Adalat
for the purpose of conciliation and
settlement but, upon failure, the Permanent
Lok Adalat cannot proceed to decide such
matters on merit, if it relates to an offence
irrespective of the fact as to whether it is
compoundable or not. If the dispute relates
to an offence, the Permanent Lok Adalat
will have no jurisdiction to decide the
matter on merits.

27. In the light of the aforesaid, the
matter relating to theft of energy is an
offence under the Electricity Act, 2003 and
even though such offence is compoundable,
the
Permanent
Lok
Adalat
has
the
jurisdiction to entertain the dispute for the
purpose of conciliation and settlement but
upon its failure, the Permanent Lok Adalat
could not proceed to decide the matter on
merits.

28. In the present case, the
Permanent Lok Adalat has decided the
matter on merits, which is without
jurisdiction. In the light of the aforesaid,
the impugned award of the Permanent
Lok Adalat cannot be sustained and is
quashed. The writ petition is allowed.

29. Let a certified copy of this order
be circulated by the Registrar General to
all the Permanent Lok Adalats within four
weeks for information and necessary
action.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.12.2013

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE V.K. SHUKLA, J.
THE HON'BLE SUNEET KUMAR, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 47279 of 2012

Poonam Gour... Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors... .Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Deepak Saxena, Sri Ranjit Saxena

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

Constitution
of
India,
Art.-226-Caste
certificate-petitioner
after
competing
M.B.B.S.-get admitted in M.S. course under
sc/st category-alleging herself to 'Gond'-as
per direction of Court earlier matter
referred to govt.-Distt. level committee as
well as state level committee-without
affording opportunity of hearing-held-
'Gond'-
as
kahar-the
backward
class
pursuance to direction of court appeared
final examination but result not declaredin view of law laid down by Apex Court in
State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind case
direction for declaration of result-given
issued ignoring caste certificate-subject to
outcome of decision of state level caste
security committee.

(Delivered by Hon'ble V. K. Shukla, J.)

1. Poonam Gour D/o Ram Kewal
resident of village and post Sihaitpur
District Gorakhpur has approached this
Court with a request to direct the State
Level
High
Power
Caste
Scrutiny
Committee, to verify the caste certificate of
the petitioner of Caste Gond sub Caste
Dhuriya in pursuance of the report of
vigilance dated 14.06.2011 and to quash the
order dated 14.10.2011 passed by State
Government, Social Welfare Department
wherein State Level High Power Caste
Scrutiny
Committee
has
asked
the
Committee constituted under Chairmanship
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
37
of District Magistrate, to make inquiry and
to submit its opinion to the State
Government.

2. During the pendency of the
aforesaid writ petition, petitioner, by
means of first amendment application, has
proceeded to challenge the validity of
report dated 06.08.2013 submitted by
District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee,
disallowing the claim of the petitioner by
accepting petitioner to be belonging from
"Gond" caste.

3. Thereafter by means of second
amendment application, as the State Level
Caste Scrutiny Committee has also taken
decision, prayer has been made to quash
the order dated 16.08.2013 passed State
Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and
further prayer has been made to direct the
Moti
Lal
Nehru
Medical
College,
Allahabad to declare the result of MS
Course passed by the petitioner in the
year 2001, the result whereof has been
withheld.

4. Brief background of the case as is
emanating from the record in question is
that petitioner claims that she belongs to
Gond caste sub caste Dhuriya and she has
completed MBBS course in the year 1996
from King George Medical College
(KGMC) Lucknow. Petitioner submits
that she has undertaken Post Graduate
entrance
examination
for
obtaining
Master's Degree in year 2001 and has
been selected to undertake M.S Course
from Moti Lal Nehru Medical College
Allahabad. Petitioner submits that at the
point of time when she has been accorded
admission in M.S. Course, prior to it for
enabling her to undertake said entrance
examination authorities on request of
petitioner has issued fresh caste certificate
to her showing that petitioner belongs to
"Gond" caste. Petitioner submits that
thereafter, in the year 2000 her caste
certificate in question has been cancelled
on 14.3.2000 and in such a situation in
this background she was not permitted to
undertaken
examination
and
then
petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition
No. 11536 of 2000 (Dr. Poonam Gour Vs.
Principal,
M.L.N.
Medical
College,
Allahabad) and in the said writ petition
petitioner has been accorded permission
to pursue her M.S. Course. Petitioner
submits that said writ petition is still
pending and she has completed her M.S.
Course but her result has not been
declared so far due to non-finalization of
issue of her caste certificate.

5. Petitioner submits that in the said
direction she has been requesting that her
caste status should be cleared and at the said
point of time petitioner has gone to the
extent of filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition
No. 16817 of 2001( Poonam Gour Vs.
Collector, Gorakhpur and others) and in the
said writ petition this Court has proceeded
to pass order directing to make an
application before the Chief Secretary,
Government of Uttar Pradesh Lucknow and
upon such application being made, the
Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar
Pradesh was asked to refer the matter to the
High Powered Committee constituted for
determining the nature and status of the
petitioners' community as to whether she is
covered under the said category or not and
to take appropriate decision. Petitioner
submits that an application has been moved
in the said direction and the copy of the
judgement has also been supplied to the
Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar
Pradesh, Lucknow. Joint Secretary, U.P.
Government Social Welfare Lucknow
thereafter giving reference of letter dated
38 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
05.08.2010 and giving reference of the
decision of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ
Petition
No.
16817
of
2001
dated
09.04.2010 wrote letter addressed to
Director, Backward Classes Social Welfare
Department
Lucknow
and
mentioned
therein that to verify at the Directorate
Social Welfare Department there is no
vigilance cell constituted to undertake
exercise for verification of caste status of
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
candidates as no one of the Home
Department
is
posted
therein
and
accordingly claim of the petitioner should
be got examined by the vigilance cell
constituted under Directorate meant for
Backward Classes and comments be got
received.

6. Thereafter vigilance cell working
under the Directorate, Backward Classes
Lucknow made its inquiry and submitted
its report mentioning therein that it would
be appropriate in case petitioner is issued
certificate from Scheduled Tribes and
accordingly report in question has been
submitted and thereafter same has been
forwarded to the Director. Director at the
said point of time, proceeded to address a
letter to State Government that large scale
complaints are being received and matter
should be got examined by the District
Level Caste Scrutiny Committee. State
Government accepted the said request.

7. On receiving of the said report in
question, the District Level Caste Scrutiny
Committee on the asking of State Level
Scrutiny Committee submitted its report
on 06.08.2013 and therein altogether
different view was taken that petitioner
has failed to substantiate her claim that
she is entitled for caste certificate of
belonging
from
Scheduled
Tribes
category. Thereafter after the said report
in question has been submitted the State
Level Caste Scrutiny Committee has taken
up the matter and has not at all accepted the
request of petitioner for accepting her to be
from Scheduled Tribes Category and it has
been mentioned therein that there is no
reason to take different or contrary view as
has been taken by the District Level Caste
Scrutiny
Committee
and
accordingly
petitioner was not at all entitled for caste
certificate of her being from Scheduled
Tribes Category.

8. To the said averments which has
come forward, counter affidavit has been
filed and to the said counter affidavit,
rejoinder affidavit has been filed and
thereafter matter has been taken up for
final hearing and disposal with the
consent of the parties.

9. Sri Ranjit Saxena, learned counsel
for the petitioner submitted with vehemence
that in the present case State Level High
Power Caste Scrutiny Committee has failed
to perform and discharge its duty at the
point of time when said committee has
proceeded to form ex-parte opinion that
petitioner is not at all from Scheduled
Tribes category and accordingly decision in
question
suffers
from
procedural
impropriety and specially in the backdrop of
the case that once vigilance cell has
submitted report in favour of the petitioner
then there was no occasion or justification
to take different and contrary view, as has
been done in the present case and
accordingly present writ petition in question
deserves to be allowed, and caste certificate
of being from Schedule Tribe, be issued
accordingly, and all benefits attached to the
same be also extended.

10. Countering the said submission,
learned Standing counsel submitted that
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
39
in the present case on the proper analysis
of the evidence available on record,
rightful view has been formed that
petitioner is not a member of Scheduled
Tribes category and cannot be accepted to
be from the said category and accordingly
no interference should be made by this
Court.

11. In order to answer the issue, as
has been raised, this Court proceeds to
examine the relevant provision of the
Constitution of India that covers the field.

"Articles 341 and 342 of the
Constitution of India read as under:-
"341. Scheduled Castes - (1) The
President [may with respect to any State
[or Union territory], and where it is a
State after consultation with the Governor
thereof] by public notification, specify the
castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups
within castes, races or tribes which shall
for the purposes of this Constitution be
deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation
to that State[or Union territory, as the case
may be].

(2) Parliament may by law include in
or exclude from the list of Scheduled
Castes specified in a notification issued
under clause (1) any caste, race or tribe or
part of or group within any caste, race or
tribe, but save as aforesaid notification
issued under the said clause shall not be
varied by any subsequent notification".

"342. Scheduled Tribes (1) The
President [may with respect to any State
[or Union territory], and where it is a
State after consultation with the Governor
thereof] by public notification, specify the
tribes or tribal communities or parts of or
groups within tribes or tribal communities
which shall for the purposes of this
Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled
tribes in relation to that State[or Union
territory, as the case may be].

(2) Parliament may by law include in
or exclude from the list of Scheduled
Tribes specified in a notification issued
under clause (1) any tribe or tribal
community or part of or group within any
tribe or tribal community, but save as
aforesaid a notification issued under the
said clause shall not be varied by any
subsequent notification."

12. By virtue of authority vested under
Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of
India, the President is empowered to issue
public notification specifying the castes,
races or tribes or part of or groups within
castes, races, or tribes which shall, for the
purposes of the Constitution be deemed to be
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes in
relation to a State or Union Territory, as the
case may be. The language and terms of
Articles 341 and 342 are virtually identical,
as what has been said in relation to Article
341 mutatis mutandis applies to Article 342
also. The prime object of the said Articles is
to provide additional protection to the
members of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes having regard to social and
educational backwardness from which they
have been suffering since a considerable
length of time. The words `castes' or `tribes'
in the expression `Scheduled Castes' and
`Scheduled Tribes' are not used in the
ordinary sense of the terms but are used in
the sense of the definitions contained in
Article 366(24) and 366(25) of the
Constitution of India. In this view, a caste is
a Scheduled Caste or a tribe is a Scheduled
Tribe only if they are included in the
Presidential Orders issued under Articles 341
and 342 for the purpose of the Constitution.
Exercising the powers vested in him, the
President has issued the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and the
40 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950
for the first time and then, subsequently,
Orders have been issued under the said
Articles in relation to Union Territories and
other States and there have been certain
amendments in relation to Orders issued
introduced, by Amendment Acts passed by
the Parliament.

13. On plain reading of the language
of these Articles same shows (1) the
President under Clause (1) of the said
Articles may with respect to any State or
Union Territory and where it is a State,
after consultation with the Governor, by
public notification specify the castes,
races or tribes or parts of or groups within
the castes, races or tribes which shall for
the purposes of the Constitution be
deemed
to
be
Scheduled
Castes/Scheduled Tribes in relation to that
State or Union Territory as the case may
be; (2) Under Clause (2) of the said
Articles, a notification issued under
Clause (1) cannot be varied by any
subsequent notification except by law
made by Parliament. Under the scheme of
things provided for, Parliament alone is
competent by law to include in or exclude
a caste/tribe from the list of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes specified in
notifications issued under Clause (1) of
the said Articles.

14. In including castes and tribes in
Presidential Orders, the President is
authorized to limit the notification to parts
or groups within the caste or tribe
depending on the educational and social
backwardness. It is permissible that only
parts or groups within them could be
specified and further to specify castes or
tribes thereof in relation to parts of the
State and not to the entire State on being
satisfied that it was necessary to do so
having regard to social and educational
backwardness. States in such matters had
opportunity to present their views through
Governors
when
consulted
by
the
President in relation to castes or tribes,
parts or groups within them either in
relation to entire State or parts of State.
The underlying object of Clause (1) of
Articles 341 and 342 was to keep away
disputes touching whether a caste/ tribe is
a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe or not
for the purpose of the Constitution and
Presidential order in the said direction
was to be accepted as final.

15. Whether a particular caste or a
tribe is Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe
as the case may be within the meaning of
the entries contained in the Presidential
Orders issued under clause (1) of Articles
341 and 342 is to be determined looking to
them as they are. Clause (2) of the said
Articles does not permit any one to seek
modification of the said orders by leading
evidence that the caste / tribe (A) alone is
mentioned in the Order but caste / tribe (B)
is also a part of caste / tribe (A) and as such
caste / tribe (B) should be deemed to be a
scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe as the
case may be. It is only the Parliament that is
competent to amend the Orders issued
under Articles 341 and 342.

16. In exercise of powers conferred by
Clause (1) of Article 341 of Constitution,
the President has issued Constitution
(Schedule Caste) Order, 1950 as amended by
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Order (Amendment) Act, 1976. In the said
order in relation to Uttar Pradesh, the castes,
races or tribes or parts of, or groups within,
castes or tribes has been specified in
Schedule, Part XVIII, and therein entry 36
relates to Gond, accepting Gond as schedule
caste. Thereafter by means of Presidential
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
41
Order, the Schedule Castes and Schedule
Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 2002, has
been published on 7.1.2003, providing
therein for inclusion in the lists of Schedule
Tribes, of certain tribes or tribal communities
or part of or group within tribes or tribal
communities, equivalent names or synonyms
of such tribes or communities, removal of
areas restrictions and bifurcations and
clubbing of entries imposition of area
restriction in respect of certain castes in the
list of Schedule Castes and the exclusion of
certain castes and tribes from the list of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, in
relation to various states including Uttar
Pradesh. Accordingly, pursuant thereto in the
Constitution
(Schedule
Tribes)
(Uttar
Pradesh) Order, 1967, after entry 5,
following insertion has been made:

"6. Gond, Dhuria, Nayak, Ojha,
Pathari, Raj Gond (in the districts of
Mahrajganj,
Sidharth
Nagar,
Basti,
Gorakhpur, Deoria, Mau, Azamgarh,
Jaunpur,
Ballia,
Ghazipur,
Varanasi,
Mirzapur and Sondhadra)

7. Kharwar, Khairwar (in the district
of Deoria, Ballia, Ghazipur, Varanasi and
Sonbhadra)"

17. Under the Constitutional scheme
of things provided for orders once issued,
cannot be varied by subsequent order or
notification even by the President except
by law made by Parliament.

18. Apex Court on numerous
occasions, encountered with such an issue
has answered in following terms.

19. In B.Basavalingappa vs. D.
Munichinnappa reported in (1965) 1 SCR
316, a Constitution Bench of Apex Court
held as follows :-

"It may be accepted that it is not
open to make any modification in the
Order by producing evidence to show (for
example) that though caste A alone is
mentioned in the Order, caste B is also a
part of Caste A and therefore must be
deemed to be included in caste A. It may
also be accepted that wherever one caste
has another name it has been mentioned
in brackets after it in the Order[see Aray
(Mala)
Dakkal
(Dokkalwar)
etc.]
Therefore generally speaking it would not
be open to any person to lead evidence to
establish that caste B (in the example
quoted above) is part of caste A notified
in the Order. Ordinarily therefore it would
not have been open in the present case to
give evidence that the Voddar caste was
the same as the Bhovi caste specified in
the Order for Voddar caste is not
mentioned in brackets after the Bhovi
caste in the Order."

(emphasis supplied)

20. Thereafter looking to the
peculiar circumstances of the case, the
Apex Court went on to say that :-

"The difficulty in the present case
arises from the fact (which was not disputed
before the High Court) that in the Mysore
State as it was before the re-orgnisation of
1956 there was no caste known as Bhovi at
all. The Order refers to a scheduled caste
known as Bhovi in the Mysore State as it
was before 1956 and therefore it must be
accepted that there was some caste which
the President intended to include after
consultation with the Rajpramukh in the
Order when the Order mentions the caste
Bhovi as a scheduled caste. It cannot be
accepted that the President included the
caste Bhovi in the Order though there was
no such caste at all in the Mysore State as it
42 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
existed before 1956. But when it is not
disputed that there was no caste specifically
known as Bhovi in the Mysore State before
1956, the only course open to courts to find
out which caste was meant by Bhovi is to
take evidence in that behalf. If there was a
caste known as Bhovi as such in the Mysore
State as it existed before 1956, evidence
could not be given to prove that any other
caste was included in the Bhovi caste. But
when the undisputed fact is that there was
no caste specifically known as Bhovi in the
Mysore State as it existed before 1956 and
one finds a caste mentioned as Bhovi in the
Order, one has to determine which was the
caste which was meant by that word on its
inclusion in the Order. It is this peculiar
circumstance therefore which necessitated
the taking of evidence to determine which
was the caste which was meant by the word
"Bhovi" used in the Order, when no caste
was specifically known as Bhovi in the
Mysore State before the re-organisation of
1956."

21. Once again Constitution Bench
of the Apex Court in a later decision of
Bhaiyalal vs. Harikishan Singh and
Others reported in (1965) 2 SCR 877 did
not accept the plea of the appellant that
although he was not a Chamar as such he
could claim the same status by reason of
the fact that he belonged to Dohar Caste
which is sub-caste of Chamar. Even after
referring to the case of Basavallingappa
(supra) it was held that an enquiry of that
kind would not be permissible in the light
of the provisions contained in Article 341
of the Constitution. In that case the
appellant's election was challenged inter
alia on the ground that he belonged to the
Dohar Caste which was not recognized as
a Scheduled Caste for the district in
question and so his declaration that he
belonged to the Chamar Caste which was
a Scheduled Caste was improper and was
illegally accepted by the Returning
Officer. The Election Tribunal declared
that the election was invalid. On appeal
the High Court confirmed the same. Apex
Court thereafter also dismissed the appeal
pointing out that the plea that the Dohar
Caste is a sub-caste of the Chamar Caste,
could not be entertained in view of the
Constitution Scheduled Castes Order,
1950 issued by the President under Article
341 of the Constitution. It is also stated
that in order to determine whether or not a
particular caste is a Scheduled Caste
within the meaning of Article 341, one
has to look at the public notification
issued by the President in that behalf. The
notification referred to Chamar, Jatav or
Mochi. The Court observed that the
enquiry, which the Election Tribunal
could hold was whether or not the
appellant is a Chamar, Jatav or Mochi and
held thus :-

"The plea that though the appellant is
not a Chamar as such, he can claim the
same status by reason of the fact that he
belongs to the Dohar caste which is a subcaste of the Chamar caste, cannot be
accepted. It appears to us that an enquiry
of this kind would not be permissible
having regard to the provisions contained
in Article 341." (emphasis supplied)

22. Thereafter Apex Court, noted
that allowing candidates not belonging to
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes to
have advantage and benefit of reservation,
either in admissions or appointments
leads to making mockery of the very
reservation against the mandate and
scheme of Constitution.

"In order to protect and promote the
less fortunate or unfortunate people who
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
43
have been suffering from social handicap,
educational backwardness besides other
disadvantages, certain provisions are made
in the Constitution with a view to see that
they also have the opportunity to be on par
with others in the society. Certain privileges
and benefits are conferred on such people
belonging to Scheduled Tribes by way of
reservations in admission to educational
institutions (professional colleges) and in
appointments in services of State. The
object behind these provisions is noble and
laudable besides being vital in bringing a
meaningful
social
change.
But,
unfortunately, even some better placed
persons by producing false certificates as
belonging to Scheduled Tribes have been
capturing or cornering seats or vacancies
reserved for Scheduled Tribes defeating the
very purpose for which the provisions are
made in the Constitution. The Presidential
Orders are issued under Articles 341 and
342 of the Constitution recognizing and
identifying the needy and deserving people
belonging
to
Scheduled
Castes
and
Scheduled Tribes mentioned therein for the
constitutional purpose of availing benefits
of reservation in the matters of admissions
and employment. If these benefits are taken
away by those for whom they are not
meant, the people for whom they are really
meant or intended will be deprived of the
same and their sufferings will continue.
Allowing the candidates not belonging to
Scheduled Tribes to have the benefit or
advantage
of
reservation
either
in
admissions or appointments leads to making
mockery of the very reservation against the
mandate
and
the
scheme
of
the
Constitution.

In the light of what is stated above,
the following positions emerge:-

1. It is not at all permissible to hold
any enquiry or let in any evidence to
decide or declare that any tribe or tribal
community or part of or group within any
tribe or tribal community is included in
the general name even though it is not
specifically mentioned in the concerned
Entry in the Constitution (Scheduled
Tribes) Order, 1950.

2. The Scheduled Tribes Order must
be read as it is. It is not even permissible
to say that a tribe, sub-tribe, part of or
group of any tribe or tribal community is
synonymous to the one mentioned in the
Scheduled Tribes Order if they are not so
specifically mentioned in it.

3. A notification issued under Clause
(1) of Article 342, specifying Scheduled
Tribes, can be amended only by law to be
made by the Parliament. In other words,
any tribe or tribal community or part of or
group within any tribe can be included or
excluded from the list of Scheduled
Tribes issued under Clause (1) of Article
342 only by the Parliament by law and by
no other authority.

4.
It
is
not
open
to
State
Governments or courts or tribunals or any
other authority to modify, amend or alter
the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in
the notification issued under Clause (1) of
Article 342.

5. Decisions of the Division Benches
of this Court in Bhaiya Ram Munda Vs.
Anirudh Patar and others (1971 (1) SCR
804) and Dina vs. Narayan Singh (38
ELR 212), did not lay down law correctly
in stating that the enquiry was permissible
and the evidence was admissible within
the limitations indicated for the purpose
of showing what an entry in the
Presidential Order was intended to be. As
stated in position (1) above no enquiry at
all is permissible and no evidence can be
let in, in the matter."
44 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

23. Apex Court, in the case of State
of Maharastra Vs. Milind AIR 2001 SC
393, reiterated the same principle, once
again that Presidential Order can be
amended only by the Parliament, and no
one be it authority, courts or tribunals
have any jurisdiction to alter the said list.
Relevant extract of the said judgement is
as follows:

"Thus it is clear that States have no
power to amend Presidential Orders.
Consequently a party in power or the
Government of the day in a State is relieved
from the pressure or burden of tinkering
with the Presidential Orders either to gain
popularity or secure votes. Number of
persons in order to gain advantage in
securing
admissions
in
educational
institutions and employment in State
Services have been claiming as belonging to
either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled
Tribes depriving genuine and needy persons
belonging
to
Scheduled
Castes
and
Schedules
Tribes
covered
by
the
Presidential
Orders,
defeating
and
frustrating to a large extent the very object
of protective discrimination given to such
people based on their educational and social
backwardness. Courts cannot and should
not expand jurisdiction to deal with the
question as to whether a particular caste,
sub-caste; a group or part of tribe or subtribe is included in any one of the Entries
mentioned in the Presidential Orders issued
under Articles 341 and 342 particularly so
when in clause (2) of the said Article, it is
expressly stated that said orders cannot be
amended or varied except by law made by
Parliament. The power to include or
exclude, amend or alter Presidential Order
is expressly and exclusively conferred on
and vested with the Parliament and that too
by making a law in that regard. The
President had the benefit of consulting
States through Governors of States which
had the means and machinery to find out
and recommend as to whether a particular
caste or tribe was to be included in the
Presidential Order. If the said Orders are to
be amended, it is the Parliament that is in a
better position to know having means and
machinery unlike courts as to why a
particular caste or tribe is to be included or
excluded by law to be made by Parliament.
Allowing the State Governments or courts
or other authorities or tribunals to hold
enquiry as to whether a particular caste or
tribe should be considered as one included
in the Schedule of the Presidential Order,
when it is not so specifically included, may
lead to problems. In order to gain advantage
of reservations for the purpose of Articles
15(4) or 16(4) several persons have been
coming forward claiming to be covered by
Presidential Orders issued under Articles
341 and 342. This apart when no other
authority other than the Parliament, that too
by law alone can amend the Presidential
Orders, neither the State Governments nor
the courts nor tribunals nor any authority
can assume jurisdiction to hold enquiry and
take evidence to declare that a caste or a
tribe or part of or a group within a caste or
tribe is included in Presidential Orders in
one Entry or the other although they are not
expressly and specifically included. A court
cannot alter or amend the said Presidential
Orders for the very good reason that it has
no power to do so within the meaning,
content and scope of Articles 341 and 342.
It is not possible to hold that either any
enquiry is permissible or any evidence can
be let in, in relation to a particular caste or
tribe to say whether it is included within
Presidential Orders when it is not so
expressly included.

24. Various issues were coming
before Apex Court wherein spurious
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
45
tribes and persons not belonging to
scheduled tribes were snatching away the
reservation benefits given to genuine
tribals,
by
claiming
to
belong
to
scheduled
tribes,
and
thus
making
constitutional provisions redundant and
otiose in such a situation and in this
background, in order to see and ensure
that caste certificates issued be scrutinised
with utmost expedition and promptitude
and there should be proper scrutiny. Apex
Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil
Vs. Additional Commissioner, 1994 (6)
SCC
241,
issued
directives
for
constitution of Caste Scrutiny Committee
and issued fifteen directions as follows:

"1. The application for grant of social
status certificate shall be made to the
Revenue-Sub-Divisional
Officer
and
Deputy
Collector
or
Deputy
Commissioner and the certificate shall be
issued by such Officer rather than at the
Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.

2. The parent, guardian or the
candidate, as the case may be, shall file an
affidavit duly sworn and attested by a
competent gazetted officer or nongazetted officer with particulars of castes
and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community,
parts or groups of tribes or tribal
communities, the place from which he
originally hails from and other particulars
as may be prescribed by the concerned
Directorate.

3. Application for verification of the
caste
certificate
by
the
Scrutiny
Committee shall be filed at least six
months
in
advance
before
seeking
admission into educational institution or
an appointment to a post.

4. All the State Governments shall
constitute a Committee of three officers,
namely, (I) an Additional or Joint Secretary
or any officer higher in rank of the Director
of the concerned department, (II) the
Director,
Social
Welfare/Tribal
Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the
case may, and (III) in the case of Scheduled
Castes another officer who has intimate
knowledge in the verification and issuance
of the social status certificates. In the case
of Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer
who has intimated knowledge in identifying
the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or
groups of tribes or tribal communities.

5. Each Directorate should constitute
a vigilance cell consisting of Senior
Deputy Superintendent of Police in over
all charge and such number of Police
Inspectors to investigate into the social
status claims. .................

6. The Director concerned, on receipt
of the report from the vigilance officer if he
found the claim for social status to be "not
genuine" or "doubtful" or spurious or falsely
or wrongly claimed, the Director concerned
should issue show cause notice supplying a
copy of the report of the vigilance officer to
the candidate by a registered post with
acknowledgement due or through the head
of the concerned educational institution in
which the candidate is studying or
employed...........
After
giving
such
opportunity either in person or through
counsel, the Committee may make such
inquiry as it deems expedient and consider
the claims vis-a-vis the objections raised by
the candidate or opponent and pass an
appropriate order with brief reasons in
support thereof.

7. In case the report is in favour of
the candidate and found to be genuine and
true, no further action need be taken
except where the report or the particulars
given are procured or found to be false or
fraudulently obtained and in the latter
46 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
event the same procedure as is envisaged
in para 6 be followed.

8. Notice contemplated in para 6
should be issued to the parents/ guardian
also in case candidate is minor to appear
before the Committee with all evidence in
his or their support of the claim for the
social status certificates.

9. The inquiry should be completed
as expeditiously as possible preferably by
day-to-day
proceedings
within
such
period not exceeding two months. If after
inquiry, the caste Scrutiny Committee
finds the claim to be false or spurious,
they should pass an order cancelling the
certificate issued and confiscate the same.
It should communicate within one month
from the date of the conclusion of the
proceedings the result of enquiry to the
parent/guardian and the applicant.

10. In case of any delay in finalizing
the proceedings, and in the meanwhile the
last date for admission into an educational
institution or appointment to an officer
post, is getting expired, the candidate be
admitted by the Principal or such other
authority competent in that behalf or
appointed on the basis of the social status
certificate already issued or an affidavit
duly
sworn
by
the
parent/guardian/candidate
before
the
competent officer or non-official and such
admission or appointment should be only
provisional, subject to the result of the
inquiry by the Scrutiny Committee.

11. The order passed by the
Committee shall be final and conclusive
only subject to the proceedings under
Article 226 of the Constitution.

12. No suit or other proceedings
before any other authority should lie.

13. The High Court would dispose of
these cases as expeditiously as possible
within a period of three months. In case,
as
per
its
procedure,
the
writ
petition/Miscellaneous petition/matter is
disposed of by a Single Judge, then no
further appeal would lie against that order
to the Division Bench but subject to
special leave under Article 136.

14. In case, the certificate obtained or
social status claimed is found to be false,
the parent/guardian/the candidate should
be prosecuted for making false claim. If
the prosecution ends in a conviction and
sentence of the accused, it could be
regarded as an offence involving moral
turpitude, disqualification for elective
posts or offices under the State or the
Union or elections to any local body,
legislature or the Parliament.

15. As soon as the finding is
recorded by the Scrutiny Committee
holding that the certificate obtained was
false, on its cancellation and confiscation
simultaneously,
it
should
be
communicated
to
the
concerned
educational institution or the appointing
authority
by
registered
post
with
acknowledgement due with a request to
cancel the admission or the appointment.
The principal etc. of the educational
institution responsible for making the
admission or the appointing authority,
should cancel the admission/appointment
without any further notice to the candidate
and debar the candidate for further study
or continue in office in a post.

[emphasis supplied]"

25. Pursuant to directive issued by
the Apex Court in the case of Kumari
Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner
Tribal Development (1994) 6 SCC 241, the
State Government on 05.01.1996 has
provided the procedure that is to be adhered
to in the matter of grant of Caste
Certificates and other allied and incidental
1 All] Poonam Gour Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
47
matters connected therewith, said decision
in question is as follows:

"2- mijksDr ds dze esa eq>s ;g dgus dk
funsZ'k gqvk gS fd ^^1994 1⁄461⁄2 ,l-lh-lh- 241 dqekjh
ek/kqjh ikfVy cuke ,fM'kuy dfe'uj Vakbcy^^
uked okn esa ek- mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 2
flrEcj] 1994 dks ikfjr fu.kZ; rFkk mlds dze esa
fjV ;kfpdk la0 2884 1⁄4,e0ch01⁄2 vkQ 1995 Mk0
vkuUn izrki flag cuke m0iz0 jkT; o vU;^^ esa ek0
mPp U;k;ky; y[kuÅ ihB y[kuÅ }kjk ikfjr
vkns'k fnukad 27 vDVwcj] 1995 ds vuqikyu esa
mijksDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk&9 }kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa
dk iz;ksx djds] 'kklu }kjk uhfr fu/kkZfjr djrs gq,
fuEufyf[kr fu.kZ; fy;s x;s gS%&

1- vkosnu i= dk izLrqrhdj.k o tkfr izek.k
i= tkjh fd;k tkuk vkj{k.k vuqeU;rk gsrq tkfr
izek.k i= iznku djus ds fy, vkosnu i= mu {ks=]
ftlesa lacaf/kr vH;FkhZ fuokl djrk gks vFkok tgka
mldk tUe gqvk gks] ds ftykf/kdkjh ;k vfrfjDr
ftykf/kdkjh ;k flVh eftLVsaV ;k ijxuk eftLVasV
vFkok rglhynkj dks lacaf/kr vH;FkhZ }kjk ;fn og
o;Ld gks] vFkok mlds ekrk&firk ;k vfHkHkkod
}kjk ;fn vko';d gks] izLrqr fd;k tk;sxk] ftlds
lkFk jktif=r vf/kdkjh }kjk izekf.kr ,d 'kiFk i=
ds lkFk vH;FkhZ dh tkfr] mitkfr] tutkfr]
tutkrh; leqnk; ;k tutkrh;&leqnk; ds oxZ ;k
Hkkx o vH;FkhZ ds ewy fuokl vkfn ls lacaf/kr ,sls
fooj.k izLrqr fd;s tk;sxsa tks vuqlwfpr tkfr o
vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds laca/k esa funs'kd] vuqlwfpr
tkfr o vuqlwfpr tutkfr dY;k.k mRrj izns'k
rFkk ukxfjdksa ds vU; fiNM+s oxksZa ds laca/k esa
funs'kd fiNM+k oxZ dY;k.k] mRrj izns'k }kjk fofgr
fd;s tk;sA

2- mijksDrkuqlkj ftl vf/kdkjh dks tkfr
izek.k i= gsrq vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k tk,xk]
larq"V gksus ij ml vf/kdkjh }kjk tkfr izek.k i=
tkjh fd;k tk;sxkA

3- tkfr izek.k i= dk lR;kiu&mijksDr
O;oLFkk ds vuqlkj fuxZr fd;s x;s tkfr izek.k i=
ds vk/kkj ij vkj{k.k dk nkok 'kklu }kjk xfBr dh
x;h fuEufyf[kr LdzwVuh desVh }kjk fd;s tkus okys
tkfr izek.k i= ds lR;kiu ds v/khu vuqeU; gksxk
ftlds fy, mDr LdzwVuh desVh dks ;FkkfLFkfr Lo;a
vH;FkhZ mlds ekrk&firk ;k vfHkHkkod }kjk 'kSf{kd
vkfn laLFkkvksa esa izos'k vFkok fdlh in lsok esa
fu;qfDr ds ;Fkk lEHko 6 ekl iwoZ vkosnu izLrqr
fd;k tk;sxk%&

1- izeq[k lfpo] lekt dY;k.k foHkkx] m0iz0
'kklu v/;{kA

2- funs'kd vuqlwfpr tkfr o vuqlwfpr
tutkfr] lnL; 1⁄4mRrj izns'k vuqlwfpr tkfr;ka o
vuqlwfpr tu tkfr;ka ds lEca/k esa1⁄2

;k