Summary
Bihar’s 2016 notification extended Scheduled Tribe certificates and benefits to Lohars by treating them with the listed Lohara community. The Court held that the executive could not alter the constitutional list or disregard binding decisions distinguishing the communities. Repeal of a 2006 amendment correcting the Hindi text did not justify the notification. It quashed the notification only as to Lohars, preserved Loharas’ existing benefits, imposed Rs.5 lakh costs and left individual criminal cases to the appropriate courts.
Issues
- Whether Bihar could extend Scheduled Tribe status to Lohars through executive notification.
- Whether repeal of the 2006 amendment justified the State’s treatment of the communities as equivalent.
- Whether delay and availability of High Court proceedings barred this Article 32 petition.
- What relief followed for existing Lohara benefits and the petitioners’ prosecutions.
Provisions considered
- Articles 14, 21, 32 and 342, Constitution of IndiaThe arbitrary executive inclusion affected equality and liberty; Article 342 did not authorise the State to alter the list, and direct fundamental-rights relief was appropriate. (¶¶ 7-12, 22-28, 31)
Held
- Binding decisions had distinguished Lohars, an OBC community in Bihar, from the listed Lohara or Lohra communities. The executive had no authority to confer the latter’s Scheduled Tribe status on the former. (¶¶ 12-20, 22-25, 28)
- The 2006 amendment aligned the Hindi text with the authoritative English version. Even assuming the effect of its repeal as urged, it could not bring Lohars into the constitutional list. Ignoring that text and the settled decisions was arbitrary. (¶¶ 19, 24-25)
- Article 32 guarantees access for fundamental-rights enforcement, subject to judicial self-restraint. The petitioners were affected by later FIRs and the liberty consequences; delay alone and the asserted private dispute did not justify refusing this challenge. (¶¶ 7-11, 26)
- Quashing operated only against the notification’s extension to Lohars. Loharas already listed under the Presidential Order retained their benefits. The judgment did not quash the petitioners’ criminal proceedings; they had to seek appropriate remedies, with the courts taking this ruling into account. (¶ 30-31)
- The State was ordered to pay Rs.5 lakh as costs within one month and produce proof within six weeks. The writ petition was allowed and pending applications disposed of. (¶ 29-31)
Result
Writ petition allowed. Notification quashed qua Lohars; existing Lohara benefits preserved. Rs.5 lakh costs payable within one month, proof within six weeks. Individual criminal-case remedies left to the appropriate forum.