MEHROTRA, C. J.: These two rules raise common questions of law and arc disposed of by one judgment. Mainly the validity of the Notification No. TAD/R/50/64 issued by the Governor of Assam on the 23rd November 1964 has been challenged. This notification will be referred to as 'the Notification' hereinafter and reads as follows:

"In exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (c), (e) and (g) of sub-paragraph (3) of Paragraph 1 of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, the Governor of Assam after consideration of the report of the Commission appointed in this behalf under this Department Notification No. TAD/Con/21/62/293, dated the 28th August 1963 is pleased to create a new autonomous district to be called the Jowai District by excluding the Jowai Subdivision of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District with effect from 1st December 1964. The boundaries of the Jowai District shall be the boundaries of the Jowai Subdivision of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District."

The petitioner Edwingson Bareh in the peti­tion giving rise to Civil Rule No. 286 of 1964 is the Chief Executive Member, District Council, United Khasi-Jaintia Hills and the petitioner Gilbert Lyton in the petition giving rise to Civil Rule No. 303 of 1964 is an elector of Jowai Constituency and al present the Secy, of the Jaintia Durbar. The back-ground of the whole controversy is that by this notification the area of the Jowai Sub-Division has been taken out of the existing Autonomous District of United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District and constituted into a new autonomous district.

(2) Article 244 (2) of the Constitution provides that the provisions of the Sixth Sche­dule shall apply to the administration of the tribal areas in the State of Assam. This Article does not define the tribal areas in the State of Assam. It only provides that whatever is the tribal area in the State of Assam will be governed by the provisions of the Sixth Schedule. What are the tribal areas in the State of Assam are set out in Paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule. Paragraph 21 of the Sixth Schedule provides:

"21(1) 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 reference to such Sche­dule as so amended.

(2) No such law as is mentioned in sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph shall be deem­ed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of Article 368."

Thus the purpose of setting out the extent of the tribal areas in the State of Assam in the Schedule and not in Article 244 of the Consti­tution is that if the tribal area is to be varied, it can be done simply by legislation of Parlia­ment as it will only involve the amendment of the Schedule and recourse will not have to be taken to the provisions of Article 368 of the Constitution for the said purpose.

(3) Mr. Lahiri who appears for the peti­tioners, contends firstly that the notification issued by the Governor of Assam amounts to amendment of Paragraph 20 of the Sixth Sche­dule, which could only be done by an Act of Parliament as provided for under Paragraph 21 of the said Schedule Secondly, he urges that even if the power of amending Paragraph 20 is assumed to have been given to the Governor under Paragraph 1(3), such a power has not been exercised by the Governor as will be evidenced from the language of the notifica­tion. Thirdly, it is contended that the power given under the Sixth Schedule paragraph 1(3) (c) only authorises the Governor to create a new autonomous district. If an autonomous district is created comprising of the area which was already part of an existing autonomous district, it cannot be said that it is a creation of a new autonomous district. In the present case as the new autonomous district of Jowai comprises of the area of the Jowai Subdivi­sion, which was part of the existing autono­mous district of Khasi and Jaintia Hills,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document