Dr. Anjana Parmar vs State Of U.P., Thru. Prin. Secy., ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 646 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
 
Lucknow Bench Lucknow
 

 
***********
 
[A.F.R.]
 
Court No. - 27
 

 
Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 1815 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Dr. Anjana Parmar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P., Thru. Prin. Secy., Karmik & Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Warsi
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Rajneesh Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi (II),J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred against the impugned order dated 26.5.2011, passed by the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad, rejecting petitioner's claim for benefit of reservation under the caste Bhotia, belonging to the category of scheduled tribe. The reason assigned therein is that in accordance with the Government order dated 9.5.2007, the caste Bhotia, does not fall within the category of scheduled tribe in the State of U.P. By assailing the impugned order, petitioner's counsel invited attention to the notification issued under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, in the year 1967 according to which, Bhotia caste, has been included under scheduled tribe. The notification as filed with the writ petition, is reproduced as under:-

"The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Uttar Pradesh) Order, 1967

(C.O.78)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 342 of the Constitution of India, the President, after consultation with the Governor of the State of Uttar Pradesh, is pleased to make the following Order, namely:-

1.The order may be called the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Uttar Pradesh) Order, 1967

2.The tribes or tribal communities, or parts of, or groups within tribes or tribal communities specified in the Schedule to this Order, shall for the purposes of the Constitution of India, be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to the State of Uttar Pradesh so far as regard members resident in that State.

THE SCHEDULE

1.Bhotia

2.Buksa

3.Jannsari

4.Raji

5.Tharu

Published with the Ministry of Law Notice No.G.S.R. 960, dated the 24th June, 1967, Gazette of India, Extraordinary, 1967, Part II, Section (1), Page 311."

3. Aforesaid notification has got constitutional mandate and accordingly, Bhotia caste comes within scheduled tribe. Article 342 provides that the President with respect to any State, after consultation with the Governor, shall issue notification specifying the tribes or tribal communities or part of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for the purposes of the Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State. Accordingly, the aforesaid proposition creates constitutional rights in favour of the petitioner to claim the benefit of Bhotia caste under the category of scheduled tribe.

4. Now, coming to the argument advanced by the respondents' counsel that in view of the order dated 9.5.2007, the petitioner is not entitled to claim benefit of reservation under scheduled tribe category, seems to be misconceived argument. The Government order dated 9.5.2007 (contained in Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) reveals that matter has been referred to the Government of India to exclude Bhotia, Jannsari and Raji castes since they are not available in the State of U.P. No decision has been taken by the Government of India in this regard. Whether the petitioner resides in State of U.P. or not and belongs to Bhotia caste or not, is a question of fact which may be looked into by the respondents and it is not for the Court but so far as the right of persons belonging to Bhotia community is concerned, it is well protected by the notification of the year 1967 (supra) and they may claim reservation as guaranteed (supra) belonging to scheduled tribes category. The letter dated 9.5.2007 is reproduced as under:-

"संख्या--15/19/2001-- का--4--2007

प्रेषक,

सुरेश चन्द्र यादव,

विशेष कार्याधिकारी,

उत्तर प्रदेश शासन।

सेवा में,

सचिव,

लोक सेवा आयोग,

उत्तर प्रदेश, इलाहाबाद।

अनुभाग--4					       लखनऊःदिनांकः 09 मई, 2007
 
विषयः- उत्तर प्रदेश की अनुसूचित जनजातियों के संबंध में ।
 
महोदय,
 

उपर्युक्त विषयक, समसंख्यक पत्र दिनांक 03 जून, 2002 के क्रम में आपको यह अवगत कराने का मुझे निदेश हुआ है कि समसंख्यक पत्र दिनांक 26.7.2004 के द्वारा भारत सरकार से यह अनुरोध किया गया था कि भेटिया, बुक्सा, जौनसारी, राजी एवं थारू जनजातियों में से मात्र बुक्सा और थारू जनजातियों के कतिया सदस्य उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य के कतिपय क्षेत्रों मे निवास करते हैं, भोटिया, जानसारी तथा राजी जनजातियों के सदस्य उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में नहीं हैं, अतः संविधान के अनुच्छेद-342(1) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों के आधार पर प्रख्यापित 'संविधान (अनुसूचितनजातियां) (उत्तर प्रदेश) 1967' को संशोधित करते हुए, भोटिया, जौनसारी एवं राजी जनजातियों को उक्त आदेश से विलोपित करने का कष्ट करें।

2. भारत सरकार द्वारा उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य के उक्त प्रस्ताव के संबंध में कतिपय संवीक्षायें की गयी हैं जिनका उत्तर समाज कल्याण विभाग के दिनांक 09 मई, 2007 के द्वारा भारत सरकार को प्रेषित करते हुए, पूर्व प्रेषित प्रस्ताव के आधार पर कार्यवाही करने का अनुरोध किया गया है।

3. उपर्युक्त से यह स्पष्ट है कि सम्प्रति प्रकरण भारत सरकार के विचाराधीन है। भारत सरकार द्वारा लिये जाने वाले निर्णय से यथासमय आयोग को अवगत कराया जायेगा।

भवदीय,

(सुरेश चन्द्र यादव)

विशेष कार्याधिकारी।

संख्या--15/19/2001(1)-- का--4--2007 तद्दिनांक।

प्रतिलिपि, निम्नलिखित के सूचनार्थ एवं आवश्यक कार्यवाही हेतु प्रेषित

1. समाज कल्याण अनुभाग- 3 को उनके पत्र संख्या-1719/26-3-2007-3 (11)/2006, दिनांक09 मई, 2007 के संदर्भ में।

2. कार्मिक अनुभाग-2

आज्ञा से,

(सुरेश चन्द्र यादव)

विशेष कार्याधिकारी।"

5. We are of the view that till notification of the year 1967 is operative, it has got force of law and being constitutional mandate, there is no option on the part of the respondents except to obey and provide reservation under Bhotia, Jannsari and Raji communities. The impugned order seems to have been passed on unfounded ground. The U.P. Public Service Commission has incorrectly interpreted the letter dated 9.5.2007 (supra) sent by the State of U.P. to Government of India. It is only the request to accept or reject it. Since prayer of the State Government of U.P. is still under consideration, the impugned order has been passed on unfounded ground and without application of mind.

6. In view of the above, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. A writ in the nature of certiorari is issued quashing the impugned order dated 26.5.2011 contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition with all consequential benefit. Respondents shall reconsider the petitioner's case for selection and appointment against available vacancies in accordance with Rules under ST category expeditiously say, within four months.

No orders as to costs.

[Justice Arvind Kumar Tripathi (II)] [ Justice Devi Prasad Singh]

Order Date :- 10.4.2013

Rajneesh DR-PS)