HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

 

Subject : Reservation for Schedule Tribes

 

WP(C) No.  6456/2003

 

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Memorial Foundation (Regd.) & Anr.                      .........     Petitioners

                                                                                       through:  Mr.Raman Duggal, Advocate.

 

                                    VERSUS        

 

Union of India & Ors.                                                                           ........      Respondent

                                                                                    through:  Ms.Manisha Dhir, Advocate

                                                                                                    for respondent No.1.

                                                                                                    Mr.George Paracken, Advocate

                                                                                                    for respondents 2 & 3.

                                                                                                    Mr.Ashok Bhasin with

                                                                                                    Mr.Chetan Dutt, Advocate

                                                                                                    for MCD.

                                                                                                    Ms.Mukta Joshi, Advocate

                                                                                                    for NDMC.

                                                                                                    Mr.M.N.Krishnamani Sr.Adv.

                                                                                                    with Ms.Renu George, Adv.

                                                                                                    for respondents 6 to 8.

                                     

 

       RESERVED ON:            28-05-2004

       DATE OF DECISION:   05-07-2004

 

           

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

 

1.         Petitioners challenge the order dated 21.8.2003 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India as also the order dated 27.8.2003 issued by the Government of NCT Delhi to the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and all heads of department/local/autonomous bodies/PSUs under the Government of Delhi.

 

2.         Order dated 21.8.2003 reads as under:-

 

U.14011/128/2001 Delhi,

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

 

New Delhi, the 21stAugust, 2003.

 

To,

           

Sh.B.V.Selvaraj

Secretary (Services)

Government of NCT of Delhi

New Delhi.

 

Sub:     Reservation for Scheduled Caste for     recruitment to   civil posts under the Government of NCT of Delhi.

 

Sir,

 

            I am directed to refer to the correspondence resting with the Govt. of NCT of Delhi (Services-III Department)'s letter No.F.19(10)/2001/S.III/2286 dated the 22nd August, 2001 regarding the subject mentioned above and to say that the instructions contained in the Ministry of Home Affairs O.M NO.7/2/55/SCT dated the 14th October, 1955, in accordance with which the percentage of reservation prescribed for recruitment on an All India basis are required to be followed in Delhi continue to be in force and applicable in respect of civil posts under the Govt. of NCT of Delhi.  Accordingly, the civil posts under the Govt.of NCT of Delhi reserved for Scheduled Tribes are required to be filled up from amongst Scheduled Tribes candidates irrespective of their nativity.

 

2.         It is accordingly requested that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi may reserve the prescribed percentage of civil posts under that Government for appointment of the Scheduled Tribes candidates as has been the practice in the past.

 

                                                                                                                        Yours faithfully,

 

                                                                                                                        (I.B.KARN)

                                                                                                                 DIRECTOR (DELHI)

                                                                                                                       TELR: 23092670

 

3.         Order dated 27.8.2003 reads as under:-

 

GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL

TERRITORY OF DELHI

(SERVICES DEPARTMENT-BRANCH-IV)

7TH LEVEL B-WING, DELHI SECRETARIAT,

I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI- 110002.

 

NO.F.16/973/97/S.III/1256                                                                             DATED:27.8.2003

 

TO,

 

 1.        The Chairman,

            Delhi Subordinate Services Selection,

            Govt. of NCT of Delhi,

            Shahdara, Delhi.

 

2.         All Head of Department/ Local/ Autonomous Bodies/ PSUs.

            Govt. of NCT of Delhi.

 

Subject: Reservation for Scheduled Tribes for recruitment of Civil posts under Govt. of NCT of Delhi.  

 

Re:    Letter No.U-14011/128/2001-Delhi, dated 21.8.2003 of MHA, Govt. of India.

 

Sir/Madam,

           

Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, vide letter cited above have clarified that the instructions contained in the MHA O.M.No.7/2/55/SCT dated 14.10.55, in accordance with which the percentages of reservation prescribed for recruitment on an All India basis are required to be followed in Delhi, continue to be in force and applicable in respect of civil post under Govt. of NCT of Delhi.  Accordingly, the civil posts under the Govt. of NCT of Delhi reserved for Scheduled Tribes are required to be filled up from amongst Scheduled Tribes candidates irrespective of their nativity.

 

 

           

            Accordingly, it has been decided that Govt. of NCT of Delhi may continue to reserve the prescribed percentage of Civil posts under the govt. for appointment of Scheduled Tribes as has been the practice in the past.

 

            Therefore, in terms of the aforesaid clarification 7.5% of Civil posts under the Govt. may be kept reserved for appointment of Scheduled Tribes candidates irrespective of their nativitiy and appropriate action for recruitment may be taken.

 

                                                                                                            Yours sincerely,

                                                                                                                        sd/

                                                                                                            (B.V.SELVARAJ)

                                                                                                      SECRETARY (SERVICES)

 

4.         Petitioner No.1, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and petitioner No.2, its President have filed the petition, praying as aforesaid.  It is stated by the society that it is formed for undertaking social activities.  It is stated that petitioners are entitled to file and maintain the petition for enforcing the provisions of the Constitution and to ensure that the rule of law is upheld.

 

5.         Main grievance of the petitioners is that in the absence of a Presidential notification issued under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, for the Union Territory of Delhi, Delhi having no Scheduled Tribes, no reservation can be effected in the Union Territory of Delhi for services under the Government of NCT Delhi, MCD and NDMC for members belonging to Scheduled Tribe.

 

6.         The background which led to the issuance of the impugned orders is the decision rendered/delivered by the Calcutta High Court in CO No.39(W) of 1992, delivered on 13.8.1993.  The said decision, by a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court was upheld by the Division Bench.  Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.2479/1997 was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 14.3.1997.

 

7.         Pursuant to OM dated 14.10.1955, being OM No.7/2/55/SCT issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, benefit of reservation was being accorded to members belonging to Scheduled Tribes for appointment in the Union Territory of Delhi.  Benefit of reservation to members belonging to the Scheduled Castes was also being granted for employment in the Union Territory of Delhi.  Benefit of reservation was being granted for appointment to the local authorities in the Union Territory of Delhi.

 

8.         Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India enables the State to make provisions for reservation for appointments or reservation to posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State is not adequately represented in the service under the State.  Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India is an enabling provision.  Its object is to create equality of opportunity by reverse discrimination, in employment in public offices. This equality of opportunity is achieved qua backward class of citizens by enabling them to compete amongst equals i.e. amongst themselves.

 

9.         Scheme of the Constitution, evidenced by Article 341 of the Constitution would reveal, that by and under a Presidential Notification, citizens of India are specified as belonging to the Scheduled Castes.  By and under a Presidential Notification issued under Article 342, citizens are specified as belonging to Scheduled Tribes.

 

10.       Article 341 and Article 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 a 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 of 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.

 

11.       A perusal of Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India would reveal that the Presidential Notifications which are issued, whether in respect of Scheduled Castes or in respect of Scheduled Tribes is "for the purposes of this Constitution" and "in relation to that State (or Union Territory, as the case may be)."  Further, if there is a Presidential Notification under Article 341(1) or Article 342(2), Parliament may be law include or exclude caste, race, tribe or group in the list of Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes notified under the Presidential Notification.

 

12.       Part VIII of the Constitution of India  deals with the Union Territories.  It consists of Articles 239 to 241.

 

13.       Article 239 envisages administration of every Union Territory by the President acting through an Administrator.  Article 239 reads as under:-

 

239. Administration of Union territories

 

(1)  Save as otherwise provided by Parliament by law, every Union territory  shall be administered by the President acting, to such extent as he thinks fit, through an administrator to be appointed by him with such designation as he may specify.

 

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Part VI, the President may appoint the Governor of a State as the administrator of an adjoining Union territory, and where a Governor is so appointed, he shall exercise his functions as such administrator independently of his Council of Ministers].

 

14.       In relation to the Union Territory of Delhi, Article 239AA introduced in the Constitution of India by the Constitution (69th Amendment) Act, 1991 with effect from 1.1.1992 provides for a Legislative Assembly, seats whereof require to be filled by members chosen by direction election from Territorial Constituencies in the National Capital Territory.  Vide Sub-Clause 3(a) of Article 239AA the Legislative Assembly has powers to make laws for the Union Territory of Delhi in respect to the matters specified under said clause (3)(a) of Article 239AA of the Constitution of India.

 

 

15.       Whereas by and under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Union Territories) Order 1951, a Presidential Notification has been issued under Article 341 of the Constitution of India specifying Scheduled Castes in relation to the Union Territory of Delhi, no notification exists under Article 342 of the Constitution of India.  Thus, in the Union Territory of Delhi, there is no Presidential Notification specifying any Scheduled Tribe in relation to the Union Territory of Delhi.

 

16.       Whether, in the absence of a Presidential Notification, listing any group of persons as a Scheduled Tribe in Delhi, can by way of executive instructions, Government of India direct that benefit of reservation be accorded to the Scheduled Tribe in the Union Territory of Delhi for public employment under the Government of Delhi, M.C.D. and N.D.M.C.?

 

17.       As noted above, the expressions "in relation to that State or Union Territory" and "for the purposes of this Constitution"  which find mentioned in Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India are relevant and would be determinative of the issue at hand.

 

18.       Respondents would urge that as per the scheme of Constitution of India, since the Union Territory of Delhi is to be administered by the President acting through an Administrator, there would be no impediment in the Union of India issuing administrative instructions, requiring reservation to be accorded to appointments/posts in the Union Territory of Delhi.

 

19.       Petitioner would urge that Article 239 has to be read harmoniously with Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India.  Petitioner would urge that the enabling provision of Article 16(4) is one of the purpose of the Constitution and, therefore, there being no Presidential Notification under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, for the purposes of reservation under Article 16(4), the sine qua non being missing, no reservation can be effected for members belonging to Scheduled Tribes.

 

20.       Sh.M.N. Krishnamani, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 contended that the issue is no longer res integra, it stands conclusively decided by the decision of the Supreme Court reported as 2004 (2) SCC 530 Chandigarh Administration Vs.Surender Kumar.

 

21.       Mr.Raman Duggal, learned counsel for the petitioners by placing reliance on the order of the Supreme Court reported as 2004 (2) SCALE S. Pushpa & Ors. Vs. S.Vachanmuga Velu & Ors. contended that the same Bench which had pronounced judgment in Surender Kumar's case  (Supra) had noted that some arguable points had not been considered in its earlier decision and had referred the matter to a larger Bench.

 

22.       Counsel further contended that the decision in Surender Kumar's case (Supra) was not applicable to the present case in as much as, said decision related to the issue of nativity and was not dealing with the question of law raised in the present petition.

 

23.       Dealing with the issue whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in a particular state would be entitled to the benefit of reservation in a different state, the Supreme Court in its decision reported as JT 1990 (2) SC 285 Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. The Dean Seth G.S. Medical College & Ors., in reference to Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India held:-

 

7.         In this connection, the provisions of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution have been noticed.  These articles enjoin that the President after consultation with the Governor where the States are concerned, by public notification, may specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities, which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State under Article 341 or 342 Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union Territory. The main question,therefore, is the specification by the President of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, as the case may be, for the State or Union Territory  or part of the State.  But this specification is 'for the purposes of this Constitution'.  It is, therefore, necessary, as has been canvassed, to determine what the expression 'in relation to that state' in conjunction with 'for the purposes of this Constitution' seeks to convey.

 

12.       It is, however, necessary to give proper meaning to the expressions 'for the purpose of this Constitution' and 'in relation to that State' appearing in Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.  The High Court of Gujart has taken the iew in two decisions, namely, Kum.Manju Singh vs. The Dean, B.J.Medical College, AIR 1986 Gujarat 175 and Ghanshyam Kisan Borikar vs. L.D.Engineering College, AIR 1987 Gujarat 83  to which our attention was drawn, that the phrase 'for the purposes of this Constitution' cannot be and should not be made subservient to the phrase 'in relation to that State' and therefore, it was held in those two decisions that in consequence, the classification made by one State placing a particular caste or tribe in the category of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes would entitle a member of that caste or tribe to all the benefits, privileges and protections under the Constitution of India.  A similar view has been taken  by the Karnataka High Court in the case of M.Muni Reddy vs. Karnataka Public Service Commission & Ors, 1981 Lab I.C.1345.  On the other hand, the Orissa High Court in the case of K.Appa Rao vs. Director of Posts & Telegraphs, Orissa & Ors, AIR 1969 Orissa 220 and the full Bench of the Bombay High Court in M.S.Malathi vs. The Commissioner, Nagpur Division & Ors, AIR 1989 Bombay 138 have taken the view that in view of the expression 'in relation to that State' occurring in Articles 341 and 342, the benefit of the status of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes would be available only in the State in respect of which the Caste or Tribe is so specified.  A similar view has been taken by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of V.B.Singh vs. State of Punjab, ILR 1976 (1) Punj & Har.769.

 

13.       It is trite knowledge that the statutory and constitutional provisions should be interpreted broadly and harmoniously.  It is trite saying that where there is conflict between two provisions, these should be so interpreted as to give effect to both.  Nothing is surplus in a Constitution and no part should be made nugatory.  This is well-settled.  See the observations of this Court in Sri Venkatamana Devaru & Ors. vs. State of Mysore & Ors., 1958 SCR 895 at 918, where Venkatarama Aiyar, J. reiterated that the rule of construction is well-settled and where there are in an enactment two provisions which cannot be reconciled with each other, these should be so interpreted that, if possible, effect could be given to both.  It, however, appears to us that the expression 'for the purposes of this Constitution' in Articles 341 as well as in  Article 342 do imply that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes so specified would be entitled to enjoy all the constitutional rights that are enjoyable by all the citizens as such.  Constitutional right e.g. it has been argued that right to migration or right to move from one pat to another is a right given to all- to scheduled castes or tribes and to non-scheduled castes or tribes.  But when a Scheduled Caste or tribe migrates, there is no inhibition in migrating but when he migrates, he does not and cannot carry any special rights or privileges attributed to him or granted to him in the original State specified for that State or area or part thereof.  If that right is not given in the migrated state it does not interfere with his constitutional right of equality or of migration or of carrying on his trade, business or profession.  Neither Article 14, 16, 19 nor Article 21 is denuded by migration but he must enjoy those rights in accordance with the law if they are otherwise followed in the place where he migrates.  There should be harmonious construction, harmonious in the sense that both parts or all parts of a constitutional provision should be so read that one part does not become nugatory to the other or denuded to the other but all parts must be read in the context in which there are used. It was contended that the only way in which the fundamental rights of the petitioner under Article 14, 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e) and 19(1)(f) could be given effect to is by construing Article 342 in a manner by which a member of a Scheduled Tribe gets the benefit of that status for the purposes of the Constitution throughout the territory of India.  It was submitted that the words "for the purposes of this Constitution" must be given full effect.  There is no dispute about that.  The words "for the purposes of this Constitution" must mean that a Scheduled Caste so designated must have a right under Articles 14, 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e) and 19(1)(f) inasmuch as these are applicable to him in its area where he migrates or where he goes. The expression "in relation to that State" would become nugatory if in all States the special privileges or the rights granted to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes are carried forwards.  It will also be inconsistent with the whole purpose of the scheme of reservation.  In Andhra Pradesh, a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe may require protection because a boy or a child who grows in that area is inhibited or is at disadvantage.  In Maharashtra that caste or that tribe may not be so inhibited but other castes or tribes might be.  If a boy or a child goes to that atmosphere of Maharashtra as a young boy or a child and goes in a comparatively different atmosphere or Maharashtra where this inhibition or this disadvantage is not there, then he cannot be said to have that reservation which will denude the children or the people of Maharashtra belonging to any segment of that State who may still require that protection.  After all, it has to be borne in mind that the protection is necessary for the disadvantaged castes or tribes of Maharashtra as well as disadvantaged castes or tribes of Andhra Pradesh.  Thus, balancing must be done as  between those who need protection and those who need no protection i.e. who belong to advantaged castes or tribes and who do not.  Treating the determination under Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution to be valid for all over the country would be in negation, to the very purpose and scheme and language of Article 341 read with Article 14(4) of the Constitution.

 

24.       The decision aforesaid was affirmed and followed by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1994) 5 SCC 244 Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra & Anr. Vs. UOI & Anr.  It was held:-

 

3.         On a plain reading of clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 it is manifest that the power of the President is limited to specifying the castes or tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or a Union Territory, as the case may be.  Once a notification is issued under clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, Parliament can by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, specified in the notification, any caste or tribe but save for that limited purpose the notification issued under clause (1), shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.  What is important to notice is that the castes or tribes have to be specified in relation to a given State or Union Territory.  That means a given caste or tribe can be a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to the State or Union Territory for which it is specified.  These are the relevant provisions with which we shall be concerned while dealing with the grievance made in this petition.

 

25.       Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in its decision reported as (2001) 1 SCC 4  State of Maharashtra Vs.Milind & Ors. held:-

 

Plain language and clear terms of these articles show  (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; (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.  In other words, 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.  In including castes and tribes in Presidential Orders, the President is authorised 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 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.  The States 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 the entire State or parts of State.  It appears that the 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  of the Constitution.  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 Parliament that is competent to amend  the Orders issued under Articles 341 and 342.(Emphasis Supplied)

 

26.       The aforesaid decisions of the Supreme Court would bring out the proposition, that purpose of reservation being to bring about adequacy of representation of members belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in a State, the phrase 'for the purposes of this Constitution' in  Article 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India has to be read in harmony with the phrase 'in relation to that State'. 

 

27.       Enabling provision of Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India has also to be read in harmony with Article 341 and Article 342 of the Constitution.  Thus, only those Castes or Tribes which were notified as per the Presidential Notification issued under Article 341 or Article 342 of the Constitution of India would be eligible for benefit of reservation as it is said persons for whom reservation is intended, to enable them to have adequate representation in the service under the State/Union Territory.

 

28.       The Supreme Court in its decision reported as 2004 (2) SCC 530 Chandigarh Administration Vs.Surender Kumar has held, pertaining to the Union Territory of Chandigarh, that since it was to be administered by the President acting through an Administrator under Article 239 of the Constitution of India, Government of India Instructions would be applicable and have to be followed by Chandigarh Administration, being a Union Territory.  Issue in the said judgment pertained to the Government of India Instructions dated 26.8.1986 to the Chandigarh Administration, requiring it to recognize SC/ST Certificates by all States for purposes of benefit of reservation for SC/ST posts in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. 

 

29.       The issue in the present case is entirely different and hence decision of the Supreme Court in Surender Kumar's case (Supra) is not applicable.

 

30.       A learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court in the decision dated 13.8.1993 in CO No.39(W) of 1992  Local Born Assocication & Ors. Vs. Andaman & Nicobar Admninstration & Ors. dealt with the issue whether in the absence of a Presidential Notification notifying any Scheduled Castes in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, could reservation be effected for service in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar for Scheduled Castes candidates.  It was held that since the President of India has not made any declaration in respect of any caste in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar as a Scheduled Caste, no post in Andaman and Nicobar could be reserved and/or kept apart for any Scheduled Caste candidates.  It was further held that the Union of India cannot reserve any post in the Island Administration for persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste unless and until, a proper declaration as required under Article 341 of the Constitution is made by the President of India in respect of the island.

 

31.       As noted above, the Letters Patent Appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge was dismissed and petition seeking Special Leave to Appeal also failed before the Supreme Court.

 

32.       One important aspect cannot be lost sight of.  Under the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991, there is no definition of Scheduled Tribe.  Section 2(f) defines a Schedule Caste.  The Government of NCT of Delhi Act, 1991 does not refer to a Scheduled Tribe for the obvious reason that for the Union Territory of Delhi, there is no Presidential Notification issued under Article 342 of the Constitution of India.

 

33.       It is accordingly held that in the absence of a Presidential Notification declaring any Tribe to be a Scheduled Tribe in the Union Territory of Delhi, under Article  342 of the Constitution of India, no posts under the Government of NCT Delhi, Local Bodies or Statutory Authorities under the Government of NCT Delhi can be reserved for Scheduled Tribes Candidates.  A writ is issued quashing the Office Order dated 21.8.2003 and 27.8.2003.

 

34.       No costs.

 

 

                                                                                                      PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

July 5th , 2004

sk