NEW DELHI: In a landmark verdict, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday held that people belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes community can get the benefit of reservation in government jobs in their home states only and they cannot avail quota in other states where they have migrated.

A five-judge bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi , N V Ramana, R Banumathi, M M Shantanagoudar and S Abdul Nazeer said a person belonging SC/ST category does not carry their status in another state or Union Territory to avail reservation and said that if he/she is allowed to avail the benefit of reservation after migrating to another state then it will amount to depriving the right to a member of SC/ST of that state.

The court noted that a particular community is notified as SC/ST in relation to a state and that concept would become “nugatory” if migrated population from other states is brought within its ambit.

“Unhesitatingly, therefore, it can be said that a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in one state cannot be deemed to be a Scheduled Caste person in relation to any other State to which he migrates for the purpose of employment or education. The expressions ‘in relation to that State or Union Territory’ and ‘for the purpose of this Constitution’ used in Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution would mean that the benefits of reservation provided for by the Constitution would stand confined to the geographical territories of a State/UT in respect of which the lists of SCs/STs have been notified by the Presidential Orders,” Justice Gogoi said in his judgment.

“If the special privileges or the rights granted to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in a particular State are to be made available in all the states and if such benefits are to be carried from the state ‘A’ to state ‘B’ on migration, the mandate of Article 341/342 would get compromised. Such a consequence must be avoided ...,” it said.

The apex court also held that the state could not tinker with list of SCs/STs by including another castes or tribes within the list saying that it could be done only by Parliament and such exercise by the state would lead to constitutional anarchy.

“The upshot of the aforesaid discussion would lead us to the conclusion that the Presidential Orders issued under Article 341 in regard to Scheduled Castes and under Article 342 in regard to Scheduled Tribes cannot be varied or altered by any authority including the court. It is the Parliament alone which has been vested with the power to so act, that too, by laws made. SCs and STs thus specified in relation to a state or a UT does not carry the same status in another state or UT. Any expansion/deletion of the list by any authority except Parliament would be against the constitutional mandate,” it said.

The five judges were unanimous in their view that reservation benefits should be restricted to SCs/STs in their home states but Justice Banumathi disagreed on the issue of allowing the quota benefits to people migrated to Union Territories. The four judges were of the view that so far as Delhi is concerned, migrated people should be allowed to avail the benefit of reservation in Delhi subordinate services.

Concurring with four judges on restricting reservation policy to SCs/STs in their home state only, Justice Banumathi said, “Article 16(4) is only an enabling provision to provide reservation to backward classes. Clause (4) of Article 16 cannot be made applicable for the purpose of grant of benefit of reservation for SCs and STs in a state or UT, who have migrated to another state or UT and they are not members of SCs and STs in the state to which they have migrated”.

“The Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes thus specified in relation to one state or UT does not carry their status in another state or UT. When SCs or STs are specified for each State and in some cases, specific areas of the state or UT, neither the state legislature nor the courts can include or exclude other Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes so specified in some States or Union Territories which would be against the mandate of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution and the Presidential Orders issued thereon. If that is permitted, it would amount to addition or alteration of the Presidential Order which is violative of the constitutional scheme,” she said.

Referring to Nagraj verdict which at present is being examined by another constitution bench, the court said the Presidential Orders which enumerate lists of castes/races, tribes recognized as 'Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe' cannot be challenged or agitated in a court of law except on a limited ground.

