Court to decide on 100 p.c. quota for STs in tribal areas

The Supreme Court on Thursday referred to a Constitution Bench for hearing an important question of law as to whether 100 per cent reservation in posts for teachers could be made in favour of Scheduled Tribes in schools in scheduled areas.

A Bench, comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma, referred the appeal to Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia for posting it before a Constitution Bench. The special leave petition (SLP) was directed against a Full Court judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High court that upheld a Government Order (G.O.), which provided for 100 per cent reservation for tribals.

The Constitution Bench will also decide whether such reservation was

ultra vires the basic structure of the Constitution or not.

It will also consider the scope of paragraph 5 (1), Schedule V — whether the exercise of power conferred therein could override fundamental rights; does the power extend to subordinate legislation; and does the provision empower the Governor to make a new law.

Andhra Pradesh created about 1,500 posts of primary school teachers under the control of the zilla parishad or mandal parishad in villages where there were no schools. It issued a G.O. that provided for 100 per cent reservation of such posts for Scheduled Tribes.

The notification issued by the Governor said the object of providing such reservation was to increase the literacy in scheduled areas, which could be achieved by ensuring the presence of a teacher in every school there.

Though the State Administrative Tribunal quashed the G.O., the High Court upheld it. The SLP is directed against this judgment.

It was submitted in the SLP that the High Court judgment was contrary to the basic structure of the Constitution. It was also contended that the G.O. was discriminatory as it affected not only the open category candidates but also other reserved category candidates. It said reservation under Article 16 (4) should not exceed 50 per cent.

Senior counsel L. Nageswara Rao, appearing for appellant Chebrolu Leela Prasad, on Thursday argued that there was no nexus between the classification evolved in the notification in favour of one local Scheduled Tribe and the object purportedly sought to be achieved.

He said the provision of reservation for only one local Scheduled Tribe was violative of the concept of reservation and sought the quashing of the impugned judgment.