# EDWINGSON BAREH v. STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS - **Citation:** [1966] 2 S.C.R. 770 - **Court:** Supreme Court of India - **Decided:** 1965-11-29 - **Bench:** P. B. Gajendragadkar, K. N. Wanchoo, M. Hidayatullah, V. Ramaswami, P. Satyanarayana Raju - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/edwingson-bareh-v-state-of-assam-and-others-3754 - **Pages:** 45 ## Headnote Constitution of India, 1950, VI Governor's power-If Parliamentary changes effective. Schedule, Para 1(3)-Scope of legislation necessary . to. make On 26th January 1950, the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District was formed as one of the Tribal Areas of Assam. The area along with other Tribal Areas mentioned in Parts A and B of the Table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, are governed A B c by the provisions prescribed by that Schedule. Under Paragraph 2(4) of the Schedule, the administration of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District vested in the District Council inaugurated on 27th June 1952. D The appellant was elected as Chief Executive Member of the District Council in March 1963, and by various notifications the term of the District Council has been extended up to 2nd May 1965. On 26th August 1963, the Governor of Assam appointed a Commission under paragraph 14(1) to examine and report on the creation of a new autonomous district for the people of Jowai sub-division and for excluding it from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District. The Commission made its report for such creation and exclusion on 20th January 1964. The E Council of Ministers considered the ·report, decided to accept the recommendation, drew up an explanatory memorandum as required by paragraph 14(2) of the Schedule and sent the entire file to the Governor who noted on it "seen thanks". The Minister in charge, then laid the report of the Commission and the explanatory memorandum, stating that the Government had decided to accept the recommendation of the Governor on the report, before the Assembly. and the Assembly passed a resolution approving the action proposed. On 23rd November 1964, F the Governor issued a Notification by which the new autonomous district was created and was excluded from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District with effect from !st December 1964. The appellant challenged the Notification by a petition for the issue of a writ in the High Court., which was dismissed. In appeal to this Court, it was contended that : (i) Paragraph 1 (3) of the Schedule does not confer upon the Governor power to constitute a new autonomous district and that it could be done only by Parliamenta:ry legislation under Paragraph 21 of the Schedule under which powers are granted to Parliament to amend the Schedule and ev~n if he had the power, the. Governor's decision must be confirm•ed by Par1iamentary legislatiofl; and (ii) the Notification was invalid because the mandatory provisions of paragraph 14 had not been complied with. HELD (Per Chief Justice, Wanchoo, Ramaswami and Satyanarayana Raju, JJ.) : (i) When paragraph 1(3) (c) provides that the Governor may, by public notification, create a new autonomous districts; it does not contemplate, that the Constitution requires something more to be done by Parliament, in order to make the notification effective. [782 A] G H • ' • • • A ·' B c D r E F G • H EDWJNGSON v. ASSAM 771 Paragraph 1 ( 3) confers on the Governor power to issue a notification for the purposes of bringing about any of the results enumerated by els. (a) to (g) of the paragraph. Clause (c) refers to the power of Governor to create a new autonomous district; cl. ( e) refers to the power to diminish the area of any autonomous district, and cl. (g) refers to the power to define the boundaries of any autonomous district. The proviso to the paragraph imposes a condition on the exercise of the powers conferred by els. ( c) to ( f) by requiring the Governor before exercising the powers to appoint a Commission under Paragraph 14(1) to report on those matters and then to consider its report. Paragraph 1 ( 3) indicates that the Constitution has delegated to the Governor a part of the power conferred on Parliament itself by paragraph 21. If the Governor has been clothed with the rele,vant power, the exercise of the power must by itself, be effective to bring about the results intended by els. (c) to (f) of paragraph 1 (3). T ## Text _Characters 0–39,754 of 115,216. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39754 for what follows._ 770 EDWINGSON BAREH v. STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS November 29, 1965 (P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., K. N. WANCHOO, M. HIDAYATULLAH, V. RAMASWAMI AND P. SATYANARAYANA RAJU, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950, VI Governor's power-If Parliamentary changes effective. Schedule, Para 1(3)-Scope of legislation necessary . to. make On 26th January 1950, the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District was formed as one of the Tribal Areas of Assam. The area along with other Tribal Areas mentioned in Parts A and B of the Table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, are governed A B c by the provisions prescribed by that Schedule. Under Paragraph 2(4) of the Schedule, the administration of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District vested in the District Council inaugurated on 27th June 1952. D The appellant was elected as Chief Executive Member of the District Council in March 1963, and by various notifications the term of the District Council has been extended up to 2nd May 1965. On 26th August 1963, the Governor of Assam appointed a Commission under paragraph 14(1) to examine and report on the creation of a new autonomous district for the people of Jowai sub-division and for excluding it from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District. The Commission made its report for such creation and exclusion on 20th January 1964. The E Council of Ministers considered the ·report, decided to accept the recommendation, drew up an explanatory memorandum as required by paragraph 14(2) of the Schedule and sent the entire file to the Governor who noted on it "seen thanks". The Minister in charge, then laid the report of the Commission and the explanatory memorandum, stating that the Government had decided to accept the recommendation of the Governor on the report, before the Assembly. and the Assembly passed a resolution approving the action proposed. On 23rd November 1964, F the Governor issued a Notification by which the new autonomous district was created and was excluded from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District with effect from !st December 1964. The appellant challenged the Notification by a petition for the issue of a writ in the High Court., which was dismissed. In appeal to this Court, it was contended that : (i) Paragraph 1 (3) of the Schedule does not confer upon the Governor power to constitute a new autonomous district and that it could be done only by Parliamenta:ry legislation under Paragraph 21 of the Schedule under which powers are granted to Parliament to amend the Schedule and ev~n if he had the power, the. Governor's decision must be confirm•ed by Par1iamentary legislatiofl; and (ii) the Notification was invalid because the mandatory provisions of paragraph 14 had not been complied with. HELD (Per Chief Justice, Wanchoo, Ramaswami and Satyanarayana Raju, JJ.) : (i) When paragraph 1(3) (c) provides that the Governor may, by public notification, create a new autonomous districts; it does not contemplate, that the Constitution requires something more to be done by Parliament, in order to make the notification effective. [782 A] G H • ' • • • A ·' B c D r E F G • H EDWJNGSON v. ASSAM 771 Paragraph 1 ( 3) confers on the Governor power to issue a notification for the purposes of bringing about any of the results enumerated by els. (a) to (g) of the paragraph. Clause (c) refers to the power of Governor to create a new autonomous district; cl. ( e) refers to the power to diminish the area of any autonomous district, and cl. (g) refers to the power to define the boundaries of any autonomous district. The proviso to the paragraph imposes a condition on the exercise of the powers conferred by els. ( c) to ( f) by requiring the Governor before exercising the powers to appoint a Commission under Paragraph 14(1) to report on those matters and then to consider its report. Paragraph 1 ( 3) indicates that the Constitution has delegated to the Governor a part of the power conferred on Parliament itself by paragraph 21. If the Governor has been clothed with the rele,vant power, the exercise of the power must by itself, be effective to bring about the results intended by els. (c) to (f) of paragraph 1 (3). The power must be exercised subject to the condition prescribed by the proviso, but once it is properly exercised it becomes effective and there is no need for parliamentary legislafon in that behalf. [780 H; 781 A-B, C-D; 782 B, C-DJ The two Acts, namely Act 18 of 1954 and Act 42 of 1957, one for renaming a District and the other for excluding an item from Part A and including it in Part B, do not show any legislative practice requiring parliamentary legislation with respect to the matters covered by the Notification. [782 G; 783 DJ It is not necessary that for an effective exercise of his power by the Governor there should be confirmation by Parliamentary legislation, because, the power of Parliament under paragraph 21 is very wide and includes the power to take away the Governor's power, and in the very unlikely event of the Governor attempting to challenge the decision of Parliament in respect of any of the matters mentioned in Paragraph 1(3), Parl'amcnt can take away his power altogether by suitable legislation. [783 FJ . The modification made by the impugned Notification does not affect the contents of paragraph 20( 1), because, even after the Notification the paragraph truly and correctly provides that the areas specified in Parts A and B of the table shall be tribal areas within the State. What the Notification purports to do is to change one item into two. Since the power to bring about the change is expressly conferred on the Governor by paragraph 1(3)(c) to (g), the exercise of that power, which leads to a consequential change in paragraph 20(2) which just gives a discription of the areas, does not require Parliamentary legislation to make the change effective. Therefore, it would not be reasonable to hold that without Parliamentary legislation the impugned Notification cannot validly effect any change in item 1 of Part A of the table appended to paragraph 20. [784 C-E, H; 786 B, OJ (ii) The power conferred on the Governor by paragraph 1(3) had been validly and properly exercised by him. One of the conditions prescribed by paragraph 14 i• that the Qovernor should consider the report submitted by the Commission and make his recommendations. Even if the Governor was expected to apply his mind and make a recommendation., he is not precluded from receiving the msistance of the Council of Ministers before he makes up his mind, and. on the record it must be held that the Commission recommended that a new autonomous district should be created and that the Governor agreed with the recommendation. [789 F; 790 BJ Though the Commission appointed under paragraph. 14 used the \vords "District Council" on con.5idering its recommendations as a whole 772 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1966] 2 S.C.R. there is no doubt that what it recommended was the creation of a new A autonomous district. [787 F-0] Per Hidayatullah, J. (dissenting) : No action could be effective with· out Parliamentary legislation under Paragraph 21 to amend the opera· tive portion of paragraph 20 which Parliament alone can amend, Further, the Governor, far from playing the key role which the policy underlying the Schedule envisages, left the entire matter to the Government. (i) When the final step is taken to divide a tribal area it amends the Sixth Schedule. Paragraph 1 (3) says nothing about the amendment of paragraph 20, and the Governor has no power under els. (c), (d) and ( e) to amend the paragraph or the Table appended to it. A power to amend paragraph 20 and an amendment of the paragraph and the table cannot be implied, in view of paragraph 21, under which powers are granted to Parliament to amend the Schedule. Even if it is not an amendment for purposes of Art. 368, the amendment cannot be such a simple affair that a Notification of the Governor amends the provisions by implication. If the Notification alone did that there would be antinomy between the Notification and the Schedule. Paragraph 20 and the Table will remain unaltered and the Notification will render them obsolete. Therefore, to complete the chain of steps the power under paragraph 21 must be exercised to alter the autonomous districts" the names and areas of which are laid down by Parliament. The Governor's Notification is one of the means of achieving the change but effectiveness can only be given by Parliament as it was done on previous occasions when Act 18 of 1954 and Act 42 of 1957 were passed. There ii no material as to what the practice or procedure was that was followed when changes were made in the tribal areas, except that on previous occasions Parliamentary legislation was undertaken, and while it is not conclusive, it is a circumstance which also points in the direction that Parliamentary legislation must cap all other steps if the Schedule is to read true to the new situation. [803 C,F-H; 804 F-H; 813 PIH] (ii) The history of these hackward tracts and the scheme of the Sixth Schedule show that the Governor is intended to discharge opecial functions in the administration of the tribal areas in Assam in which a start in democratic institution is being made. In the present case the Governor was very much in the background and the initiation and formation of opinion was by the State Government. He was only informed after everything was over. [810 F; 813 E] The functions of the Governor are not made subject to the scrutiny of the Government of Assam, and the Union also has not been given the power to give directions as to the administration of these autonomous districts. The Governor is expected to act independently and not with B c D E F the advice of Ministers. Should difference arise between them the legislature would decide. Under paragraph 14(2) there is provision for the G appointment of Commissions for various purposes mentioned in that paragraph and paragraph 16. As regards the changes in autonomous districts contemplated by paragraph 1(3)(c) to (f), if the State Government agreed with the Governor there would be no need to explain what action the Government was going to take; it has only to implement the decision administratively and the Governor would notify the changeo. The need for an explanatory memorandum arises if the Governor'• recommendations are not accepted by the State Government. Apart from H this control by the Legislature in specified matters, there is nothing to show that in addition the District and Regional Councils, which are autonomous in almost every way, are to be controlled by the Council of • • ,. ' • I • ' • ' EDWINGSON V. ASSAM (Gajendragadkar, C.J.) 773 A Ministers through the Governor. The Governor's note hardly squared with the special responsibilities contemplated by the Schedule. [805 D-E; 810 G; 811 B, D-0; 812 A, F] B c \) E F G II Even in the Commission's recommendation there was some confusion, though it may be conceded that when reference was made to a council, an autonomous district was meant. [813 DJ C1v1L APPELLATE JuRtsmcnoN : Civil Appeal No. 968 of 1965. Appeal from the judgment and order dated February 5, 1965 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Civil Rule No. 286 of 1964. M. C. Setalvad, and D. N. Mukherjee, for the appellant. C. K. Daphtary, Attorney-General, and Naunit Lal, for the respondents. The Judgment of GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., WANCHOO, RAMASWAMI AND RAJU, JJ. was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J. HIDAYATULLAH, J. delivered a dissenting Opinion. Gajendragadkar, C.J. The appellant, Edwingson Bareh, belongs to the village of Barato in Jowai area of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District in Assam. He is an elector from the said area to the District Council of the said United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District. In fact, he was elected as a member to the said District Council from Nongjngi Constituency (No. 23). This constituency fell within the Jowai area of the said District. Later, the appellant was elected as Chief Executive Member of the District Council in March, 1963. By virtue of his office, he draws a monthly salary and other allowances under the provisions of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District Council Chairman's, Deputy Chairman's and Executive Member's Salaries and Allowances Act, 1953. He is entitled to hold the said office till a new District Council is elected and takes over. On the 26th January, 1950, when the Constitution came into force, the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District was formed as one of the Tribal Areas of Assam, and in this area were merged the Khasi States with the other areas of the Khasi-Jaintia Hills. The boundaries of this area are defined by paragraph 20(2) of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution. All . the Tribal Areas mentioned in Part A and Part B of the Table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule are governed by the provisions prescribed by the Sixth Schedule. Under paragraph 2(4) of the said Schedule, the administration of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District vested in the District 774 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1966] 2 S.C.R. Council which was inaugurated on the 27th June, 1952. This Council consists of 24 different constituencies out of which 6 are in the Jaintia Hills area. The District Council has been clothed with administrative, legislative and judicial powers over the territory of the District by the relevant provisions of the Sixth Schedule. By the notification issued on the l st of June, 1964, No. TAD/R/8/62, the term of the present District Council was extended up to the 2nd January, 1965, or until the newly elected District Council takes over. By a subsequent notification issued in December, 1964, No. TAD/R/8/62, the period of the said Council was further extended from 3rd January, 1965 to the 2nd May, 1965. Under the present administration set up, the Executive Committee of the District Council consists of three members including the Chief Executive Member and two other members, and all the executive functions of the said Council are vested in the Executive Committee. Purporting to act on certain representations received by him, • A ' B c the Governor of Assam appointed a Commission under paraD graph 14(1) of the Sixth Schedule on the 26th August, 1963. This Commission was required "to examine and report in the matter of, ( 1) creation of a new autonomous District for the people of Jowai Sub-Division of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous District, and (2) exclusion of the area from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous District." The CommisE sion made its report on the 20th January, 1964 and recommended "'the creation of a new autonomous District Council for the Jowai Sub-Division of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous Disfa trict by excluding the areas comprising the area of the said SnbDivision from the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous District." F Thereafter, the Minister-in-charge of the Tribal Areas and Welfare of Backward Classes Department of the Government of Assam laid before the Assam Legislative Assembly during its autumn session of 1964 the report of the Commission with an -explanatory memorandum made on the 25th September, 1964. G This memorandum stated that the Government had decided to pccept the recommendation of the Governor on the said report .and give effect to it. After the report was thus placed before the Legislative Assembly, the Assembly passed a resolution approving of the action proposed to be taken by the Government of Assam on H the report in question. On the 23rd November, 1964, a notification No. TAD/R/50/64 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Notifica- ., • ... " ii. I ""'.· .,. EDWINGSON V. ASSAM (Gajendragadkar, C.J.) 77 5 A tion') was issued by the Governor of Assam in accordance with the memorandum which had been placed before the Legislative Assembly of Assam. By this notification, the Governor of Assam was pleased "to create a new Autonomous District to be called the Jowai District by excluding the Jowai Sub-Division of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District with effect from 1st December, B 1964; and that the boundaries of the Jowai District shall be the boundaries of the Jowai Sub-Division of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District." The appellant challenged the constitutional validity of this notification by filing a writ petition before the High Court of c Assam and Nagaland on the 30th November, 1964. In his writ petition, the appellant alleged that the notification was invalid and ultra vires the powers of the Governor. Alternatively, it was urged that in exercising his powers, the Governor has contravened the mandatory requirements prescribed by paragraph 14 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution. The appellant's case was D that even if it was assumed that the Governor had the power to issue the impugned notification, inasmuch as the mandatory provisions of paragraph 14 had not been complied with, the notification was invalid. To this petition, the appellant impleaded five respondents; the first amongst them was the State of Assam; the ethers were : the Minister-in-charge of Tribal Areas and Welfare E of Backward Classes Department; the Secretary to the Government of Assam, T.A., O.B. & W.B.C. Department; the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam; and the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Tribal Areas & Backward Classes Department, respectively. F The respondents disputed the validity of the contentions raised by the appellant in his writ petition. They urged that the notification had been issued by the Governor in exercise of the powers conferred on him by paragraph 1 (3) of the Sixth Schedule and that all the relevant requirements of paragraph 14 had been complied with. The respondents did not accept the correctness of G the appellant's argument that in issuing the notification, the Governor had acted outside his authority. Since the point raised by the petition was of considerable importance, and related to the construction of the relevant provisions contained in the Sixth Schedule, the writ petition ·was placed for hearing before a special Bench of the Assam High H Coμrt consisting of three learned Judges. After the writ petition was argued, the High Court, by a majority decision, has rejected the contentions raised by the appellant and has dismissed the writ LUup.CJ/66-3 776 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1966] 2 S.C.R. petition filed by him. The minority judgment has upheld the arguments of the appellant and has held that the impugned notification is invalid. After the decision of the High Court was pronounced, the appellant applied for and obtained a certificate under Art. 132 of •the Constitution, and it is with the said certificate that he has come to this Court in the present appeal. On behalf of the appellant,. Mr. Setalvad argues that paragraph 1(3) of the Sixth Schedule does not confer on the Governor the power to constitute a new autonomous district. For the valid creation of a new autonomous district, parliamentary legislation A B is necessary. In supoort of this plea, Mr. Setalvad has relied on what he describes as "legislative practice" in that behalf. He C further contends that even if the Governor had the power to · create new autonomous district under paragraph 1 (3), the exercise of that power c'in be effective only after Parliament passes a law in accordance with the decision of the Governor. In other words, the argument is that the Governor may, by virtue of his power, decide to create a new autonomous district under paragraph 1 (3), D but the decision of the Governor must be confirmed by parliamentary legislation before it becomes effective. In the alternative, Mr. Sctalvad co.ntends that even if the Governor can effectively create a new autonomous district by virtue of his powers under paragraph 1(3), he can do so only after complying with the mandatory provisions of paragraph 14; and since these proE visions have not been complied with, the impugned notification is invalid. Before dealing with these .points, it would be convenient to refer broadly to the scheme of the Sixth Schedule which contains the provisions in relation to the administration of tribal areas in F A~sam. Article 24M 2) provides that the provisions of the Sixth Schedule shall apply to the administration of the tribal areas in the State of Assam; and that means that tribal areas in Assam would be governed not by the other relevant provisions of the Constitution which apply to the other constituent States of the Union of India, but by the provisions contained in the Sixth G Schedule. These provisions purport to provide for a selfcontained code for the governance of the tribal areas forming part of Assam and they deal with all the relevant topics in that behalf. The areas described in the table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule, consisting of Part A and Part B, constitute the tribal areas within the State of Assam; sub-paraH graph (1) of the said paragraph so provides. Sub-paragraphs (2), (2A), (2B) and (3) of paragraph 20 describe the boundaries of the :"-... • "~··-" ,. ·~· - .. 't ... ji· ;±.; -- EDWINGSON v. ASSAM (Gajendtagadkar, C./.) 777 A items mentioned in the Table. Part A of the table originally consisted of six items; the first amongst them was the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District. The item of 'The Naga HillsDistrict' which was originally included in Part A has been subsequently taken out of Part A and has been added to Part B. B c Part B which originally consisted of only one item, now consists of two items; the first item is North East Frontier Tract including other Tracts therein described; and the second is the 'Naga Hills-Tuensang Area'. Thus, paragraph 20 read with the Table gives a comprehensive description of the tribal areas falling within the State of Assam for whose administration provision is made by the other paragraphs of the Sixth Schedule. Paragraph 1 of the Sixth Schedule deals with autonomous districts and autonomous regions and confers certain specified powers on the Governor. It is necessary to read this paragraph :- "1. (1) Subject to the provisions of this paragraph, D the tribal areas in each item of Part A of the table appended to paragraph ZO of this Schedule shall be an autonomous district. E F G H (2) If there are different Scheduled Tribes in an autonomous district, the Governor may, by public notification, divide the area or areas inhabited by them into autonomous regions. (3) The Governor may, by public notification :- (a) include any area in Part A of the said table, (b) exclude any area from Part A of the said table, (c) create a new autonomous district, (d) increase the area of any autonomous district, (e) diminish the area of any autonomous district, (f) unite two or more autonomous districts or parts thereof so as to form one autonomous district, (g) define the boundaries of any autonomous district : .Provided that no order shall be made by the Gove_rnor under clauses (c), (d), (e) & (f) of this subparagraph except after consideration of the report of a Commission appointed under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 14 of this Schedule." 778 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1966] 2 S.C.R. Then follow several paragraphs dealing with the constitution of A District Councils and Regional Councils; their powers to make laws; the administration of justice in autonomous districts and autonomous regions; conferment of powers under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, on the Regional and District Councils and on certain courts and officers for the trial of certain suits, cases and offences; these are B covered by paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Paragraph 6 deals with the powers of the District Council to establish Primary Schools, etc. Paragraph 7 deals with the District and Regional Funds; paragraph 8 refers to powers to assess and collect land revenue and to impose taxes. Para. 9 has relation to licences or leases for the purpose of prospecting for, or extraction of, minerals. C Para. 10 confers on the District Council power to make regulations for the control of money-lending and trading by nontribals. Paragraphs 11 & 12 deal with the publication of laws, rules and regulations made under the Schedule; and the application of Acts of Parliament and of the Legislature of the State to autonomous districts and autonomous regions· respectively. ParaD graph 13 is concerned with the question of estimated receipts and · expenditure pertaining to autonomous districts which have to be shown separately in the annual financial statement. Paragraph 14 is concerned with the appointment of a Commission and for the purpose of the present appeal, it is necessary to read it : E "(1) The Governor may at any time appoint a Commission to examine and report on any matter specified by him relating to the administration of the autonomous districts and autonomous regions in the State, including matters specified in clauses (c), (d), (e) and (0 of sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 1 of this Schedule or may appoint a Commission to inquire into and report from time to time on the administration of autonomous districts and autonomous regions in the State generally and in particular on- (a) the provision of edocational and medical facilities and communications in such districts and regions; (b) the need for any new or special legislation in respect of such districts and regions; and (c) the administration of the laws, rules and regulations made by the District and Regional Courtcils; and define the procedure to be followed by such Commission. F G H • • ...,.., y A B c D E EDWINGSON v. ASSAM (Gajendragadkar, CJ.) 779 (2) The report of every such Commission with the recommendations of the Governor with respect thereto shall be laid before the Legislature of the State by the Minister concerned together with an explanatory memorandum regarding the action proposed to be taken thereon by the Government of Assam. (3) In allocating the business of the Government of the State among his Ministers the Governor may place one of his Ministers specially in charge of the welfare of the autonomous districts and autonomous regions in the State." Paragraph 15 deals with the annulment or suspension of acts and resolutions of District and Regional Councils. Paragraph 16 deals with the dissolution of a District or a Regional Council; paragraph 17 is concerned with the exclusion of areas from autonomous districts in forming constituencies in such districts. Paragraph 18 is concerned with the application of the provisions of this Schedule to areas specified in Part B of the table appended to paragraph 20; while paragraph 19 deals wiih the transitional provisions. Paragraph 21 which is the last paragraph in the Sixth Schedule, is relevant for our purpose; it reads thus :- "(!) Parliament may from time to time by law amend by way of addition, variation or repeal any of the provisions of this Schedule and, when the Schedule is so amended, any reference to this Schedule in this Constitution shall be construed as a reference to such ·Schedule as so amended. (2) No such law as is mentioned in sub-paragraph F (1) of this paragraph shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of Article 368." G H That, broadly stated, is the scheme of the provisions contained in the Sixth Schedule. It is plain that under paragraph· 21, Parliament can make a law amending by way of addition, variation or repeal any of the provisions of the Sixth Schedule and when such an amendment is made, reference to the Sixth Schedule in the Constitution shall naturally be construed as a reference to such Schedule as so amended. In other words, Parliament is clothed with legislative competence of the widest amplitude in relation to any changes it likes to make in any of the provisions contained in the Sixth Schedule. Paragraph 21 (2) has provided that any changes 780 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1966] 2 S.C.R. soug)lt to be introduced by parliamentary legislation under the A power conferred on Parliament by sub-paragraph (1) thereof shall not be deemed to amount to an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Art. 368. There can thus be no doubt that if Parliament wants to make any changes in any provisions of the Sixth Schedule, it is entitled to do so; and that obviously means that the change which has·been introduced by the impugned notiB fication might as well have been made by Parliament. The question which calls for our decision is : can the same change be validly introduced by the Governor in exercise of the powers conferred on him by paragraph 1(3) or not? We have already noticed that the effect of paragraph 20 read C with the table appended to it is that the areas specified in Part A and Part B of the said table amount to tribal areas within the State of Assam. Now, paragraph 1(1) of the Sixth Schedule provides that the tribal areas in each item of Part A of the table appended to paragraph 20 shall be an autonomous district, subject to the provisions of paragraph 1. '.(his provision is clear in two D respects. It does not cover the areas specified in Part B of the table; its application is confined to the areas in each item of Part A of the table alone. It is also clear that the tribal areas in each item of Part A aforesaid shall be an autonomous district, · but that would be so subject to the provisions of paragraph 1. In other words, if any changes are made by the Governor in E exercise of the powers conferred on him by paragraph 1(3 ), those changes will have to be read into the relevant item in Part A of the table, and paragraph 20 will have to be considered in the light of the changes thus introduced in the said item. What is the extent of the power conferred on the Governor by paragraph 1(3) and how it can be exercised, are matters to which we will F turn presently; but confining ourselves to the provisions of para 1 ( 1), it seems clear that the exercise of the powers prescribed by para 1 ( 3) has an impact on the description of the items in Part A of the table appended to para 20; and that impact is that the changes made in the description of the items will be G introduced in Part 9 and thereby the scope and effect of para 20 will, in consequence, be suitably modified. Paragraph 1 (3) confers on the Governor power to issue notification for the purpose of bringing about any of the results enumerated seriatim by clauses (a) to (g). In the present case, H we are not called upon to consider what clauses (a) and (b) really