http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 13  

PETITIONER: MARRI CHANDRA SHEKHAR RAO

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DEAN, SETH G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT02/05/1990

BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (CJ) BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (CJ) RAMASWAMY, K. RAY, B.C. (J) SHARMA, L.M. (J) SAWANT, P.B.

CITATION:  1990 SCR  (2) 843        1990 SCC  (3) 130  JT 1990 (2)   285        1990 SCALE  (1)3

ACT:     Constitution   of   India,  1950:   Articles   341   and 342--Scheduled   Castes   and   Scheduled   Tribes--Reserva- tion--Whether  one who is recognised as Scheduled  Tribe  in the State of origin and birth continues to have the benefits or privileges or rights in the State of Migration? Interpre- tation  of the expressions ’in relation to that  State’  and ’for the purposes of this Constitution’.     Professional  Colleges--Admission to--Maharashtra  State Medical College--Admission to--Applicant belonging to  Gouda Community Scheduled Tribe in Andhra Pradesh--Gouda Community not  Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra--Applicant not  entitled to claim seat on the basis of reservation.

HEADNOTE:     The Petitioner was born in Tenali in the State of Andhra Pradesh and belonged to the Gouda Community which is claimed to  have  been  recognised as ’Scheduled  Tribe’  under  the Constitution. His father had been issued an Scheduled  Tribe Certificate and it is on the basis of the quota reserved for Scheduled  Tribes  that he was appointed in  the  Fertilizer Corporation of India and later with the Rashtriya Chemical & Fertilizer, Ltd., and posted in Bombay since 19.6.1978.  The Petitioner  was also living with his father in Bombay  since the age of nine years and took his education there upto 12th standard  securing 165 marks in the aggregate,  in  Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics.     For  the academic year 1989-90 he applied for  admission to  the M.B.B.S. Course in three colleges run by the  Bombay Municipal  Corporation and one by the State  of  Maharashtra seeking  the benefit of reservation in favour of the  Sched- uled  Tribes. The Petitioner was not admitted to any of  the colleges  though  some scheduled tribe  candidates  who  had secured lesser marks than him were admitted. The reason  for denial of admission to him was that he was not entitled’  to scheduled tribe Status of his origin and birth as Gouda  was not recognised as Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra State. 844 Disposing of the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner, this

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 13  

Court,     HELD:  Equality  is  the dictate  of  our  Constitution. Article  14  ensures  equality in its fullness  to  all  our citizens. State is enjoined not to deny to any person equal- ity  before law and equal protection of the law  within  the territory of India. Where, it is necessary, however, for the purpose  of  bringing  about real  equality  of  opportunity between  those  who are unequals, certain  reservations  are necessary  and these should be ensured. Equality  under  the Constitution  is  a dynamic concept which must  cover  every process  of  equalisation.  Equality must  become  a  living reality  for the large masses of the people. Those  who  are unequal, in fact, cannot be treated by identical  standards; that  may be equality in law but it would certainly  not  be real equality. Existence of equality of opportunity  depends not  merely  on  the  absence of  disabilities  but  on  the presence of abilities. Dejure equality must ultimately  find its reason of the indefacto equality. [848E-G]     Balancing must be done as between those who need protec- tion  and  those  who need no protection,  i.e.,  those  who belong to advantaged castes or tribes and those who do  not. Treating the determination under Articles 341 and 342 to  be valid  for all over the country would be innegation  to  the very  purpose  and scheme and language of Article  341  read with Article 15(4). [855C-D]     Nothing is surplus in a Constitution and no part  should be made nugatory. Having regard, however, to the purpose and the scheme of the Constitution which would be just and  fair to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes not only of one State  of origin but other states also where  the  Scheduled Castes  or Tribes migrate in consonance with the  rights  of other  castes  or community, rights  would  be  harmoniously balanced. Reservations should and must be adopted to advance the prospects of weaker sections of society, but while doing so care should be taken not to exclude the legitimate expec- tations of the other segments if the community [858A-B]     The  petitioner  is not entitled to be admitted  to  the Medical  Colleges  in Maharashtra on the basis that  he  be- longed  to the scheduled tribe in Andhra Pradesh. The  ques- tion of petitioner’s right to be admitted as being  domicile does not fail for consideration. [860E] 845

JUDGMENT: ORIGINAL JURISDlCTON: writ Petition (Civil) No. 989 of 1989. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).     Raju Ramachandran, Mrs. Sadhna Ramachandran and Ravinder Bhatt for the Petitioner.     Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, S.K. Dholakia.  R.P. Bhatt,  A.S. Bobde, V.A. Gangal, A.S. Bhasme, Ms. A.  Subha- shini, V.NGanpule and S. Sukumaran for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     SABYASACHI  MUKHARJI,  CJ. The issues involved  in  this writ  petition under Article 32 of the Constitution  are  of seminal  importance  for  the country and  the  people.  The principles  which  should  be applicable  in  governing  the problem   are  indisputable.  Their  application,   however, presents certain amount of anxiety.     The  petitioner,  a citizen of India, was  born  on  6th October,  1969 in Tenali in the State of Andhra Pradesh.  He belongs to the Gouda community also known as "Goudu", it  is stated  in  the petition. This community  is  recognised  as ’scheduled  tribe’  in the Constitution  (Scheduled  Tribes)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 13  

Order, 1950, as amended upto date. We are not concerned with the correctness or otherwise of the factual position on this aspect in this application. The father of the petitioner had been  issued a Scheduled Tribe Certificate by the  Tasildar, Tenali, Andhra Pradesh on 3rd August, 1977. On the basis  of the  said  certificate,  the father of  the  petitioner  was appointed  in the Fertilizer Corporation of India, a  public sector  undertaking, on 17th October, 1977 in the  Scheduled Tribes  quota.  On  the 19th June,  1978,  the  petitioner’s father joined the Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers  Ltd., a Government of India undertaking, under the quota  reserved for  Scheduled  Tribes and he has been stationed  in  Bombay since  then.  The  petitioner, therefore, came  to  live  in Bombay,  in the state of Maharashtra, since the age of  nine years.  The  petitioner completed his secondary  and  higher education  in Bombay. In March, 1989, the petitioner  passed the  12th  standard examination of  ’the  Maharashtra  State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Examination,  Bombay Divisional  Board,  securing 165 marks in the  aggregate  in Physics,  Chemistry and Mathematics. For the  academic  year 1989-90, the petitioner submitted his application for  three medical  colleges  in  Bombay which are run  by  the  Bombay Municipal Corporation (Respondent No. 2 herein) and for  one medical  college in Bombay run by the State  of  Maharashtra (respondent No. 3). The total number of 846 seats  in  the three medical colleges run by  the  Municipal Corporation for the MBBS Course is 400 out of which 7%  i.e. 28  seats  were  reserved for Scheduled  Tribes.  The  total number  of seats in the medical college run by the State  of Maharashtra  is  200 out of which 7% i.e. 14 seats  are  re- served  for  Scheduled  Tribes. The  petitioner  sought  and availed  the  benefit of the reservation in  favour  of  the Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner was however not admitted to the  MBBS course in either the medical colleges run  by  the Bombay  Municipal Corporation or the State  of  Maharashtra, though  indubitably  Scheduled  Tribes  candidates  who  had secured lesser marks than him had been admitted. The  undis- puted  reason for denial of admission to the petitioner  was that  the  petitioner was not entitled  to  Scheduled  Tribe status  of his origin, in which this community is  specified as a Scheduled Tribe in the Constitution (Scheduled  Tribes) Order, 1950.     There is a circular dated 22nd February, 1985 issued  by the  Government  of India, Ministry of Home  Affairs  which, inter alia, states: "It  is also clarified that a Scheduled  Caste/Tribe  person who  has  migrated from the State of origin  to  some  other State for the purpose of seeking education, employment  etc. will be deemed to be a Scheduled Caste/Tribe of the State of his origin and will be entitled to derive benefits from  the State  of  origin  and not from the State to  which  he  has migrated.     The admission forms issued by the Municipal  Corporation as well as Government indicate the requirement of "domicile" of  15 years. The petitioner states that he has  produced  a domicile certificate indicating his stay in Maharashtra  for over 10 years since 1978. This issue, however, is not before this  Court in this writ petition. This issue had  not  been raised before this Court. In the counter-affidavit filed  on behalf of the State of Maharashtra, the objection was on the interpretation of Article 342 of the Constitution and  there was no contention raised on the question of domicile. It is, therefore, necessary to refer to Article 342. Article 342 of the Constitution reads as follows:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 13  

"342. Scheduled Tribes:  (i) 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 847 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."     In this connection, it may also be relevant to refer  to Article 341 as it deals with the Scheduled Castes: "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  notifica- tion,  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."     The  question, therefore, that arises in this  case,  is whether  the  petitioner can claim the benefit  of  being  a Scheduled  Tribe in the State of Maharashtra though he  had, as he states, a Scheduled Tribe certificate in the State  of Andhra  Pradesh?  Inasmuch as we are not concerned  in  this application with the controversy as to whether the petition- er correctly or appropriately belongs to the Gouda community or not, or whether the petitioner had a proper  certificate, it  is  desirable to confine the controversy  to  the  basic question, namely, whether one who is recognised as a  Sched- uled Tribe in the State of his origin and birth continues to have  the benefits or privileges or rights in the  state  of migration or where he later goes. In this connection, the provisions of Articles 34 1 and  342 of the 848 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 and 342 Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or  Union Territory.  The main question, therefore, is the  specifica- tion  by the President of the Scheduled Caste  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  pur- poses of this Constitution’ seeks to convey.     Article 15 of the Constitution prohibits  discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of  birth. Article 15(4), however, enjoins that nothing in that article

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 13  

or  in  clause (2) of Article 29 of the  Constitution  shall prevent the State from making any special provision for  the advancement  of  any  socially  and  educationally  backward classes  of  citizens or for the Scheduled  Castes  and  the Scheduled Tribes. Therefore, reservation in favour of Sched- uled Tribes or Scheduled Castes for the purpose of  advance- ment of socially or educationally backward citizens to  make them  equal with other segments of community in  educational or job facilities is the mandate of the Constitution. Equal- ity  is the dictate of our Constitution. Article 14  ensures equality  in  its  fullness to all our  citizens.  State  is enjoined  not to deny to any person equality before law  and equal  protection of the law within the territory of  India. Where, it is necessary, however, for the purpose of bringing about  real  equality of opportunity between those  who  are unequals,  certain  reservations  are  necessary  and  these should  be  ensured. Equality under the  Constitution  is  a dynamic concept which must cover every process of  equalisa- tion.  Equality must become a living reality for  the  large masses of the people. Those who are unequal, in fact, cannot be  treated by identical standards; that may be equality  in law  but it would certainly not be real equality.  Existence of equality of opportunity depends not merely on the absence of  disabilities  but on presence of abilities.  It  is  not simply  a  matter of legal equality. De jure  equality  must ultimately  find its raison d’tre in de facto equality.  The State  must, therefore, resort to compensatory State  action for  the purpose of making people who are factually  unequal in  heir wealth, education or social environment,  equal  in specified  areas.  it is necessary to take into  account  de facto  inequalities  which exist in he society and  to  take affirmative action by way of giving preference 849 and  reservation to the socially and economically  disadvan- taged persons or inflicting handicaps on those more advanta- geously placed, in order to bring about real equality.  Such affirmative  action  though  apparently  discriminatory   is calculated to produce equality on a broader basis by  elimi- nating de facto inequalities and placing the weaker sections of the community on a footing of equality with the  stronger and more powerful sections so that each member of the commu- nity,  whatever is his birth, occupation or social  position may enjoy equal opportunity of using to the full his natural endowments of physique, of character and of intelligence. In this  connection. reference may be made to the  observations of  this  Court in Pradeep Jain & Ors. v. Union of  India  & Ors., [1984] 3 SCC 654.     It appears that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in some  States had to suffer the social disadvantages and  did not  have the facilities for development and growth. It  is, therefore,  necessary in order to make them equal  in  those areas  where they have so suffered and are in the  state  of under  development  to have reservations  or  protection  in their  favour so that they can compete on equal  terms  with the more advantageous or developed sections of the  communi- ty. Extreme social and economic backwardness arising out  of traditional practices of untouchability is normally  consid- ered  as criterion for including a community in the list  of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The social conditions of a caste, however, varies from state to state and it  will not  be  proper to generalise any caste or any  tribe  as  a Scheduled  Tribe or Scheduled Caste for the  whole  country. This,  however, is a different problem whether a  member  of the Scheduled Caste in one part of the country who  migrates to another State or any other Union Territory should contin-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 13  

ue to be treated as a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe  in which he has migrated. That question has to be judged taking into consideration the interest and well-being of the Sched- uled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the country as a whole.     It has, however, to be borne in mind that a man does not cease  to  belong to his caste by migration to a  better  or more  socially  free and liberal atmosphere. But  if  suffi- ciently  long time is spent in socially advanced  area  then the  inhibitions  and handicaps suffered by belonging  to  a socially  disadvantageous community do not continue and  the natural  talent  of a man or a woman or a boy or  girl  gets full  scope  to flourish. These, however,  are  problems  of social adjustment i.e. how far protection has to be given to a  certain segment of socially disadvantaged  community  and for  how  long to become equal with others is  a  matter  of delicate social adjustment. These must be so balanced in the 850 mosaic of the country’s integrity that no section or  commu- nity  should  cause  detriment or  discontentment  to  other community or part of community or section. Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes belonging to a particular area of  the country  must  be  given protection so long as  and  to  the extent  they  are  entitled in order to  become  equal  with others. But equally those who go to other areas should  also ensure that they make way for the disadvantaged and disabled of that part of the community who suffer from inabilities in those areas. In other words, Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes say of Andhra Pradesh do require necessary protection as  balanced  between  other communities.  But  equally  the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes say of Maharashtra  in the  instant  case, do require protection in  the  State  of Maharashtra,  which  will  have to be in  balance  to  other communities. This must be the basic approach to the problem. If one bears this basic approach in mind, then the  determi- nation  of  the  controversy in the instant  case  does  not become  difficult.  For  the purpose  of  understanding  the problem, it may be worthwhile to refer to the Report of  the Joint  Committee of the Parliament on the  Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes (Amendment) Order Bill, 1967.  It  may also  be worthwhile to refer to the proceedings of the  Con- stituent  Assembly on the 17th September, 1949 dealing  with Articles 303 and 304, which later on became Articles 341 and 342  respectively. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar moving  the  Resolution observed as follows: "That after article 300, the following articles be inserted: 300A.(1)  The  President may, after  consultation  with  the Governor or Ruler of a State, by public notification specify the  castes,  races or tribes or parts of or  groups  within castes  races  or tribes, which shall for purposes  of  this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to the State. (2)  Parliament  may by law include in or exclude  from  the list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification  issued by the President under clause (1) of this article 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  notifica- tion. 300B.(1)  The  President  may after  consultation  with  the Governor or Ruler of a State, by public notification specify the  tribes  or  tribal communities or parts  of  or  groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for purposes of this 851 Constitution be deemed to be scheduled tribes in relation to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 13  

that State. (2)  Parliament  may by law include in or exclude  from  the list of scheduled tribes specified in a notification  issued by the President under clause (1) of this article 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.          The object of these two articles, as I stated,  was to  eliminate  the necessity of burdening  the  Constitution with long lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. It is now proposed that the President, in consultation with the Governor or Ruler of a State should have the power to  issue a  general  notification in the Gazette specifying  all  the Castes  and tribes or groups thereof deemed to be  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of the  privi- leges which have been defined for them in the  Constitution. The only limitation that has been imposed is this: that once a  notification  has been issued by  the  President,  which, undoubtedly, he will be issuing in consultation with and  on the  advice of the Government of each State, thereafter,  if any elimination was to be made from the List so notified  or any addition was to be made, that must be made by Parliament and  not  by the President. The object is to  eliminate  any kind of political factors having a play in the matter of the disturbance in the Schedule so published by the President."     Our attention was also drawn to the views of Prof.  K.T. Shah in the Constituent Assembly which are as follows: "That  at the end of clause (2) of article 9, the  following be added:-- ’or  for  Scheduled  Castes or backward  tribes,  for  their advantage, safeguard or betterment’" The clause, as it is, stands thus: "Nothing in this article shall prevent the States from mak- 852 ing any special provision for women and children." Sir, it must be distinguished from the preceding article.  I read it, at any rate, that this is a provision for discrimi- nation  in  favour of women and children, to  which  I  have added the Scheduled Castes or backward tribes. This discrim- ination  is in favour of particular classes of  our  society which,  owing to an unfortunate legacy of the  past,  suffer from disabilities or handicaps. Those, I think, may  require special treatment; and if they do require it, they should be permitted  special  facilities for some time  so  that  real equality of citizens be established. The  rage for equality which has led to provide equal  citi- zenship  and  equal  fights for women  has  sometimes  found exception in regard to special provisions that, in the  long range,  in the interest of the country or of the  race,  ex- clude  women  from certain  dangerous  occupations,  certain types of work. That I take it, is not intended in any way to diminish  their civic equality or status as citizens. It  is only intended to safeguard, protect or lead to their better- ment  in  general; so that the long-range interests  of  the country may not suffer. In regard to the scheduled castes and backward tribes, it is an  open secret that they have been neglected in  the  past; and  their fights and claims to enjoy and have the  capacity to  enjoy  as equal citizens happens to be  denied  to  them because  of  their backwardness. I seek  therefore  by  this motion  to include them also within the scope of  this  sub- clause (2), so that any special discrimination in favour  of them  may not be regarded as violating the basic  principles of equality for all classes of citizens in the country. They

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 13  

need  and must be given, for some time to come at any  rate, special  treatment  in  regard to education,  in  regard  to opportunity  for employment, and in many other  cases  where their present inequality, their present backwardness is only a hindrance to the rapid development of the country. Any  section of the community which is backward must  neces- sarily  impede the progress of the rest; and it is  only  in the interest of the community itself, therefore, that it  is but 853 right  and proper we should provide facilities so that  they may be brought up-to-date so to say and the uniform progress of all be forwarded.          I have, of course, not included in my amendment the length  of  years,  the term of years for  which  some  such special  treatment may be given. That may be  determined  by the  circumstances  of  the day. I only want  to  draw  your attention to the fact that there are classes of our citizens who  may  need,  through no fault of  theirs,  some  special treatment if equality is not to be equality of name only  or on  paper  only,  but equality of fact. I  trust  this  will commend  itself to the House and the amendment will  be  ac- cepted."     It is, however, necessary to give proper meaning to  the expressions ’for the purposes of this Constitution’ and  ’in relation to that State’ appearing in Articles 341 and 342 of the  Constitution. The High Court of Gujarat has  taken  the view in two decisions, namely, Kum. Manju Singh v. The Dean, B.J.  Medical  College, AIR 1986 Gujarat 175  and  Ghanshyam Kisan  Borikar v.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 v. 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 v. Director  of  Posts  & Telegraphs, Orissa & Ors., AIR 1969 Orissa 220 and the  full Bench  of the Bombay High Court in M.S. Malathi v. The  Com- missioner, 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  bene- fit  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 v. State of Punjab, ILR 1976 1 Punjab & Haryana 769. It is trite knowledge that the statutory and  constitutional provi- 854 sions should be interpreted broadly and harmoniously. It  is trite saying that where there is conflict between two provi- sions,  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 Venkataramana  Devaru  & Ors. v. State of Mysore & Ors., [1958] SCR 895 at 918, where Venkatarama Aiyar, J. reiterated that the rule of  construc- tion is well-settled and where there are in an enactment two

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 13  

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  expres- sion ’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  part 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  inhi- bition  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 these 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 Constitu- tion  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 right under  Arti- cles  14, 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e) and 19(1)(f) inasmuch as  these are applicable to him in his 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 855 forward. 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  completely  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 advan- taged castes or tribes and who do not. Treating the determi- nation under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution to  be valid  for all over the country would be in negation to  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 13  

very  purpose and scheme and language of Articles  341  read with Article 15(4) of the Constitution.     Our  attention  was  drawn to  certain  observations  in Elizabeth Warburton v. James Loveland, [1832] House of Lords 499. It is true that all provisions should be read  harmoni- ously.  It is also true that no provision should be so  read as  to  make other provisions nugatory  or  restricted.  But having regard to the purpose, it appears to us that harmoni- ous construction enjoins that we should give to each expres- sion--’in  relation to that state’ or "for the  purposes  of this  Constitution"--its  full meaning and give  their  full effect.  This must be so construed that one must not  negate the other. The construction that reservation made in respect of  the Scheduled Caste or tribe of that State is so  deter- mined to be entitled to all the privileges and rights  under the Constitution in that State would be the most correct way of reading, consistent with the language, purpose and scheme of the Constitution. Otherwise, one has to bear in mind that if reservations to those who are treated as Scheduled  Caste or Tribe in Andhra Pradesh are also given to a boy or a girl who  migrates and gets deducted in the State of  Maharashtra or other States where that caste or tribe is not treated  as Scheduled  Caste or Scheduled Tribe then either  reservation will  have  the effect of depriving the  percentage  to  the member  of that caste or tribe in Maharashtra who  would  be entitled  to  protection or it would denude the  other  non- Scheduled  Castes or non-Scheduled Tribes in Maharashtra  to the  proportion  that they are entitled to. This  cannot  be logical or correct result designed by the Constitution. 856     In the case of Pradeep Jain v. Union of India,  (supra), this Court held that a wholesale reservation of seats on the basis of residence requirement within the State or  institu- tional preference would be violative of Article 14.  Equally it  is argued that a construction of Article 342 which  com- pletely  prevents  a  Scheduled Tribe  candidate  of  Andhra Pradesh from getting a medical seat in Maharashtra under the Schedule  Tribe quota would be violative of Article  14.  It would  not  be so, because a Scheduled  Tribe  candidate  of Andhra  Pradesh  will  be entitled to all  the  benefits  in medical colleges of the State of Maharashtra. It was  argued that  under  articles  19(1)(d), (e) and (f),  if  a  parent wishes  to keep his child with him, the opposite view  would necessarily  mean that he must remain confined to  his  home State, disregarding all suitable job opportunities commensu- rate  with  his  education, experience and  talent.  We  are unable  to accept this submission. These are not  additional protection,  i.e., he can only enjoy the protection  of  the Scheduled  Caste or Scheduled Tribe but he cannot enjoy  the protection of non-Scheduled Tribes or Castes in addition  to the existing fundamental rights.     It  is  further  submitted that the  view  canvassed  on behalf  of the petitioner finds support in Durga Das  Basu’s Commentary  on the Constitution of India, 6th Edition,  Vol. N--page 149, where it is stated as follows: "’In relation to that State’. 1. A caste which is  specified as  a Scheduled Caste in a particular State may not  deserve to  be  so specified in another State. But when a  caste  is specified in the President’s Order in relation to a particu- lar State, it does not mean that a person belonging to  that caste  should be considered to be the member of a S.C.  only for that State alone. Once a caste is included in the Sched- uled Castes Order, that would be for purposes of the Consti- tution."     It  was submitted on the basis of the decision  of  this

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 13  

Court  in  Pradeep Jain’s case (supra)  that  the  residence requirement  of 15 years in order to be eligible for  admis- sion to medical colleges in Maharashtra is wholly arbitrary, unreasonable  and hence violative of Article 14 of the  Con- stitution. Our attention was drawn to the decisions of  this Court  in D.P. Joshi v. The State of Madhya Bharat  &  Anr., [1955] 1 SCR 12 15 and Minor P. Rajendra v. State of  Madras & Ors., [1968] 2 SCR 786 on the question of residence quali- fication.  In the view we have taken and in the  context  of the controversy in the instant case, we are 857 of the opinion that this question will not be relevant.     We  have heard learned Attorney General of India and  he has  drawn our attention to the policy followed by the  Gov- ernment  of  India for the Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes. The policy seems to be as under: "I.  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are  entitled  to derive  benefits of the All India Services or admissions  in the educational institutions controlled/administered by  the Central Government, irrespective of the State to which  they belong. The reservation in force in favour of the  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes in filling vacancies  in  posts and  services  under the Government of India are as  in  the enclosure (Chapter II of the Brochure on the Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Services issued  by the  Government  of India). The reservations  for  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes in the All India  Services  are covered by these provisions and at present are 15% and  7.5% respectively.  The  Central  Government/Government  services include  the All India Services i.e. the Indian  Administra- tive Service, the Indian Police Service, the Forest Service, etc. II.  The  direct  recruitment in respect of  the  All  India Services is made on all India basis and the Scheduled  Caste and  Scheduled Tribe Candidates recruited at  the  indicated percentages of 15 and 7.5 respectively, are allotted to  the States.  The quota or the number of officers to be  allotted to each State is decided in advance, taking into  considera- tion  the  cadre  gap and the impending  retirement  in  the direct  recruitment  quota. For example, if a State  has  12 direct vacancies, 22.5% of that would be 2.70. In that case, 2.70  would  be rounded off to 3 and to that State  cadre  3 officers belonging to the reserved category would be  allot- ted."     This, however, does not affect the present  controversy. We also had the advantage of heating the Advocate General of Maharashtra-Mr.  A.S. Bobde. Mr. Raju  Ramachandran  learned advocate for the petitioner urged before us to take holistic view of the Constitution. Indeed, he is fight that a  holis- tic approach to the different provisions of the Constitution should be taken. 858     Having regard, however, to the purpose and the scheme of the Constitution which would be just and fair to the  Sched- uled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes, not only of one State  of origin  but other states also where the Scheduled Castes  or tribes migrate in consonance with the rights of other castes or community, fights should be harmoniously balanced. Reser- vations should and must be adopted to advance the  prospects of  weaker  sections  of society, but while  doing  so  care should  be taken not to exclude the legitimate  expectations of the other segments of the community.     We  have reached the aforesaid conclusion on the  inter- pretation of the relevant provisions. In this connection, it may  not be inappropriate to refer to the views of Dr.  B.R.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 13  

Ambedkar  as  to  the prospects of the  problem  that  might arise,  who  stated in the Constituent Assembly  Debates  in reply to the question which was raised by Mr. Jai Pal  Singh ("Safeguards  for  Scheduled Caste and  Tribes-Founding  Fa- ther’s  view"  by H.S. Saksena, at p. 60) which are  to  the following effect: "He  asked me another question and it was this. Supposing  a member of a scheduled tribe living in a tribal area migrates to  another part o/the territory of India, which is  outside both the scheduled area and the tribal area, will he be able to  claim from the local government, within whose  jurisdic- tion he may be residing: the same privileges which he  would be entitled to when he is residing within the scheduled area or within the tribal area? It is a difficult question for me to  answer. If that matter is agitated in quarters  where  a decision on a matter like this would lie, we would certainly be  able to give some answer to the question in the form  of some clause in this Constitution. But, so far as the present Constitution  stands,  a member of a scheduled  tribe  going outside  the scheduled area or tribal area  would  certainly not be entitled to carry with him the privileges that he  is entitled to when he is residing in a scheduled area or a tribal  area.  So far as I can see, it will  be  practically impossible  to enforce the provisions that apply  to  tribal areas  or scheduled areas, in areas other than  those  which are covered by them  .....  "     In  that view of the matter, we are of the opinion  that the petitioner is not entitled to be admitted to the medical college  on  the  basis of Scheduled  Tribe  Certificate  in Maharashtra. In the view we 859 have taken, the question of petitioner’s right to be  admit- ted as being domicile does not fall for consideration.     Having  construed the provisions of Article 341 and  342 of  the  Constitution in the manner we have done,  the  next question  that falls for consideration, is, the question  of the  fate of those scheduled caste and scheduled tribe  stu- dents  who get the protection of being classed as  scheduled caste  or  scheduled tribes in ’the States of  origin  when, because  of transfer or movement of their father  or  guard- ian’s  business or service, they move to other States  as  a matter of voluntary transfer, will they be entitled to  some sort  of protective treatment so that they may  continue  or pursue  their  education. Having considered  the  facts  and circumstances of such situation, it appears to us that where the  migration  from one State to other is  involuntary,  by force  of circumstances either of employment or  of  profes- sion,  in  such cases if students or persons  apply  in  the migrated  State  where without affecting  prejudicially  the rights of the scheduled castes or scheduled tribes in  those States or areas, any facility or protection for  continuance of study or admission can be given to one who has so migrat- ed  then some consideration is desirable to be made on  that ground.  It would, therefore, be necessary and  perhaps  de- sirable  for the legislatures or the Parliament to  consider appropriate legislations bearing this aspect in mind so that proper  effect  is given to the rights  given  to  scheduled castes  and  scheduled tribes by virtue  of  the  provisions under  Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, This  is  a matter  which the State legislatures or the  Parliament  may appropriately take into consideration.     Having  so held, now the question is, as to what  is  to happen to the petitioner in this case. As we have held,  the petitioner  is  not entitled to be admitted to  the  Medical College  on the basis that he belongs to scheduled tribe  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 13  

his original State. The petitioner has, however, been admit- ted.  He has progressed in his studies. But he had given  an undertaking  that  he will not insist on the  basis  of  the admission.  If we allow him to continue with his studies  in Maharashtra’s  College  where he has been  admitted  on  the undertaking given after he has not succeeded in this  appli- cation,  it would be.a bad precedent. We must,  however,  do justice.  The  boy’s  educational prospects  should  not  be jeopardised since he has progressed to a certain extent  and disqualifying  him at this stage or this year on the  ground that he is not entitled to the protection of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, would not confer any commensurate  bene- fit  to scheduled castes or scheduled tribes in  Maharashtra or  for that matter on anybody else. It is,  therefore,  de- sirable that the question whether he is genuinely 860 belonging to Gouda community and whether this community is a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, should be first properly and appropriately determined. As mentioned hereinbefore,  we have  not  examined this question.  After  determining  that whether after making provisions for the scheduled castes and scheduled  tribes of Maharashtra, if any facility of  admis- sion  or  continuance of study can be given in  the  Medical College in Maharashtra to the petitioner herein, the author- ities  incharge of the Institution should consider the  same and if on that considering they find it justified in  allow- ing  the petitioner to continue in his studies, they may  do so. The authorities should consider the same and take action accordingly,  as expeditiously as possible.  In  considering the question of the petitioner continuing his medical educa- tion,  the appropriate authorities should bear in  mind  the justice  of the situation.’ We, therefore, leave it  to  the authorities to take appropriate action about the continuance or  discontinuance of the petitioner in his studies  on  the basis of the aforesaid consideration. We order  accordingly. We  do so only in the background of the peculiar  facts  and circumstances  of this case. and the aforesaid  observations should not be treated as a precedent for other situations.     We,  therefore, direct that the petitioner is not  enti- tled to be admitted to the Medical College on the basis that he  belonged to the scheduled tribes in Andhra  Pradesh  but his continuance in the College will depend upon the  consid- eration  indicated hereinbefore. The writ petition  is  thus disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. R.N.J.                                        Petition  dis- posed of. 861