judgement
Subject : Constitutional Law - Scheduled Castes and Tribes
The case involved a challenge to a notification issued by the Bihar government in 2015, which sought to merge the 'Tanti-Tantwa' caste with the 'Pan/Sawasi' caste, which is listed as a Scheduled Caste in the state. The move was based on the recommendation of the State Backward Commission, which claimed that 'Tanti-Tantwa' was synonymous with 'Pan/Sawasi'.
The appellants argued that the state government had no authority to make such a change to the Scheduled Castes list, as per the provisions of Article 341 of the Constitution. They contended that any amendment to the Scheduled Castes list can only be made by an act of Parliament, not by a state government.
The state government, on the other hand, argued that the notification was merely a clarification and did not amount to an amendment to the Scheduled Castes list. They claimed that 'Tanti-Tantwa' was already a part of the 'Pan/Sawasi' caste and that the notification was intended to extend the benefits of
The Supreme Court rejected the state government's arguments, holding that the notification was clearly an attempt to tinker with the Scheduled Castes list, which is beyond the state's constitutional powers. The court emphasized that Article 341 of the Constitution is clear that any inclusion or exclusion of a caste from the Scheduled Castes list can only be done through an act of Parliament, and not by a state government.
The court also noted that the state government was aware of its lack of authority, as it had previously approached the central government in 2011 to include 'Tanti-Tantwa' in the Scheduled Castes list, but the request was not accepted.
The Supreme Court quashed the Bihar government's notification dated July 1, 2015, holding that it was unconstitutional and beyond the state's powers. The court directed the state to return the posts reserved for Scheduled Castes that were filled by members of the 'Tanti-Tantwa' community under the impugned notification, and to accommodate them under the Extremely Backward Classes category instead.
The judgment is a significant victory for the principles of federalism and the constitutional safeguards for Scheduled Castes, as it upholds the exclusive power of Parliament to make changes to the Scheduled Castes list.
#ScheduledCastes #ConstitutionalLaw #CasteReservations #SupremeCourtSupremeCourt
Khera Seeks Transit Bail Amid Assam Police Pursuit
09 Apr 2026
Copyright Suit Hits Aditya Dhar's Dhurandhar 2 Makers
09 Apr 2026
Failure to Provide Timely Repudiation Letter is Deficiency in Service Despite Valid Exclusion for Psychosomatic Disorders: South Delhi Consumer Commission
09 Apr 2026
Bail Cannot Be Denied Under UAPA on Uncorroborated Approver Testimony & Telephonic Links Sans Recovery: J&K&L High Court
09 Apr 2026
Pune Court: Swatantryaveer Title Not Government-Conferred in Gandhi Case
10 Apr 2026
Supreme Court: Temple Exclusions Harm Hinduism
10 Apr 2026
Stranger Directly Affected by Interim Order Entitled to Impleadment in Writ Proceedings: Supreme Court
10 Apr 2026
Dismissal from BSF Valid Without Security Force Court Trial if Inexpedient Due to Civilians Involved: Calcutta HC
10 Apr 2026
Limitation Under Section 468 CrPC Runs From FIR Filing Date, Not Cognizance: Supreme Court
10 Apr 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.