Bir Singh v. Delhi Jal Board & Ors.

RANJAN GOGOI, J. 1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 2017. 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others 1 (Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose for consideration of this Court: “Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the b enefits or concessions allowed to Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?” 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Cour t noticed the Constitution Bench judgments of this Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College and others 2and Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Schedul ed Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and anothe r vs. Union of India and another 3. The view of a three Judge Bench of this Court in S. Pushpa and others vs. Sivachanmugavelu and others 4 was also noticed and the same was perceived to be somewhat contrary to the view expressed by the Constitution Bench in the above two cases. This Court also took note of the fact that a two judge Bench of this Court in Subhash Chandra and another vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and others 5 held that the dicta in S. Pushpa (supra) is an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. The Bench hearing the case i.e. State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others (supra) took the view that “it was not open to a two judge Bench to say that the decision of a three judge Bench rendered f ollowing the Constitution Bench judgments to be per incuriam ”. In this regard, the canons of judicial discipline carved out by this Court in Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community and another vs. State of Maharashtra and another 6 were recalled and eventually in paragraph 13 of the opinion rendered in State of Uttaranchal vs.Sandeep Kumar Singh and ot hers (supra) the reference of the question noted below was made to a larger Bench: 1(2010) 12 SCC 794 2(1990) 3 SCC 130 3(1994) 5 SCC 244 4(2005) 3 SCC 1 5(2009) 15 SCC 458 6(2005) 2 SCC 673 535 “13. A very important question of law as to interpretation of Articles 16(4), 341 and 342 arises for consideration in this appeal. Whether the Presidential Order issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) of the Constitution has any bearing on the State’s action in making provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any Backward Class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State ? The extent and nature of interplay and interaction among Articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution is required to be resolved.” 4. The said Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006 ( State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others ) was disposed of by the larger Bench of this Court by order dated 6 th August, 2014, in the light of the findings of the High Court recorded in paragraph 4 of the High Court order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the University and the University had acted at the dictate of t he State Government, which has no power to ask for cancellat ion of an appointment made in accordance with the advertisement. In the aforesaid order dated 6 th August, 2014 this Court took the view that the conclusions recorded in paragraph 4 of the High Court order cannot be said to be legally flawed and accordingly closed the said Civil Appeal (No. 4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. The question referred was not answered. 5. However, the question arising and referred to in the State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. Accordingly, by an order of the Court dated 7 th August, 2014, the very same question as formulated in paragraph 13 of the judgment in State of Utt aranchal vs.Sandeep Kumar Singh and others(supra), as extracted above, has been referred for an answer by a five judge Bench of this Court. Tha t is how we are in seisin of the matters. 6. The factual matrix need not detain us and a brief resume will suffice. The question as to whether a policy in furtherance of the enabling provision contained in Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India could extend to giving of benefits beyond the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] Tribes of a State/Union Territory enumerated in the Presidential Orders framed/issued under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of I ndia had arisen in the bunch of writ petitions filed before the High Court of Delhi against the order/orders of the Central Administrative Tr ibunal. The learned Tribunal following Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao(supra) and Action Committee(supra), in preference to the view exp ressed in S. Pushpa (supra) (three judge Bench) held that insofar as the U nion Territory of Delhi is concerned, a migrant Scheduled Caste person would not be entitled to the benefits conferred on members of the Sc heduled Castes enumerated in the list for the Union Territory of Delhi by the Presidential Order (i.e. the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Lists (Modification) Order, 1956) in question. The Delhi High Court sitting in a Full Bench (perhaps in view of the importance of the question) found the decision in S. Pushpa (supra) to be more directly rel atable to the issue at hand i.e. being one of services in the Union Territory and, therefore, felt to be bound by the decision of the three judge Bench of this Court in S. Pushpa (supra). While doing so, the Delhi High court in paragraph 66 of the judgment emphasised on the necessity of an authori tative pronouncement on the issue(s) arising. Accordingly, certificate to appeal under Article 134-A of the Constitution was granted by the High Court. Paragraph 66 of the judgment of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court will require a specific notice and is, therefore, reproduced below: “66. This court summarizes its conclusions, as follows: (1) The decisions in Marri, Action Committee, Milind and Channaiah have all ruled that scheduled caste and tribe citizens moving from one State to another cannot claim reservation benefits, whether or not their caste is notified in the state where they migrate to, since the exercise of notifying scheduled castes or tribes is re gion (state) specific, i.e “ in relation” to the state of their o rigin. These judgments also took note of the Presidential Notifications, which had enjoined such citizens to be “residents” in relation to the state which provided for such reservations. (2) The considerations which apply to Scheduled Caste and Tribe citizens who migrate from state to state, apply equally in respect of those who migrate from a state to a union territory, in view of the text of Articles 341 (1) and 342 (1), i.e. only those castes and tribes who are notified in relation to the concerne d Union Territory, are entitled to such benefits. This is reinforced by the 537 Presidential Notification in relation to Union Territories, of 1951. Only Parliament can add to such notification, and include other castes, or tribes, in view of Articles 341 (2), Article 342(2) which is also reinforced by Article 16(3). States cannot legislate on this aspect; nor can the executive - Union or state, add to or alter the castes, or tribes in any notification in relation to a state or Union Territory, either through state legislation or through policies or circulars. Differentiation between residents of sta tes, who migrate to states, and residents of states who migrate to Union Territories would result in invidious discriminatio n and over-classification thus denying equal access to rese rvation benefits, to those who are residents of Union Territories, and whose castes or tribes are included in the Presidential Order in re spect of such Union Territories. The Pushpa interpretation has led to peculiar consequences, whereby: (i) The resident of a state, belonging to a scheduled caste, notified in that state, cannot claim reservation benefit, if he t akes up residence in another state, whether or not his caste is included in the latter State’s list of scheduled castes; (ii) However, the resident of a state who moves to a Union Territory would be entitled to carry his reservation benef it, and status as member of scheduled caste, even if his caste i s not included as a scheduled caste, for that Union Territory; (iii) The resident of a Union Territory would however, be denied the benefit of reservation, if he moves to a State, because he is not a resident scheduled caste of that State. (iv) The resident of a Union Territory which later becomes a State, however, can insist that after such event, residents of other states, whose castes may or may not be notified, as scheduled castes, cannot be treated as such members in such newly formed states; (v) Conversely, the scheduled caste resident of a state whi ch is converted into a Union Territory, cannot protest agains t the treatment of scheduled caste residents of other sta tes as members of scheduled caste of the Union Territory, even though their castes are not included in the list of such castes, for the Union Territory. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] (3) The ruling in Pushpa is clear that if the resident of a state, whose caste is notified as Scheduled caste or scheduled tribe , moves to a Union Territory, he carries with him the right to claim that benefit, in relation to the Union Territory, even though if he moves to another state, he is denied such benefit (as a resul t of the rulings in Marri and Action Committee). The ruling in Pushpa, being specific about this aspect vis-à-vis Union Territor ies, is binding; it was rendered by a Bench of three judges. (4) The later ruling in Subhash Chandra doubted the judgment in Pushpa , holding that it did not appreciate the earlier large r Bench judgments in the correct perspective. Yet, Subhash Chand ra cannot be said to have overruled Pushpa, since it was rendered by a smaller Bench of two judges. This approach of Subhash Chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a Constitution Bench in the State of Uttaranchal case. (5) By virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of Union Territories, in Pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as to the soundness of its reasoning, the High Courts have to apply its ratio, as it is by a formation of three judges; the said decision did notice the earlier judgments in Marri and Action Committee. Article 141 and the discipline enjoined by the doct rine of precedent compels this Court to follow the Pushpa ruling. (6) In matters pertaining to incidence of employment, such as seniority, promotion and accelerated seniority or promotiona l benefits, flowing out of Articles 16 (4A) and (4B) of the Constitution, there may be need for clarity, whichever rul e is ultimately preferred - i.e the Pushpa view or the Marri and Action Committee view. In such event, it may be necessary fo r the guidance of decision makers and High Courts, to spell out whether the correct view should be applied prospectively. Furthermore, it may be also necessary to clarify what would be mean t by prospective application of the correct rule, and whether such employment benefits flowing after recruitment, would be altered if the Marri view is to be preferred.” 539 7. Civil Appeal Nos.9935-9937 of 2014 from the decision of the Calcutta High court pertain to claims made by persons belonging to Uraons and Mundas members of the Scheduled Tribes communities who have migrated to the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Island . The High Court rejected the claim of reservation made by the a foresaid migrants Scheduled Tribes communities confining such benefits to the Scheduled Castes communities enumerated in the list appearing i n the Presidential Order pertaining to the Union Territory of Andam an & Nicobar Island. 8. Before delving into the constitutional provisions which would be necessary to be dealt with for answering the reference a brief look at the pre-constitutional position on the issue would throw consid erable light and provide a sound insight to the multi-faceted questions that the reference has given rise to. 9. The caste system in India, which is the bane of a just soc ial order, has a long history which can be traced to the earliest times. Ancient Hindu religious scriptures refer to the practice. Division of Society based on birth and the calling/profession of a person has continued to dominate Hindu thinking and way of life and is perhaps one of the thorny problems inherited by the British Administration which had tried to r esolve the same by giving legal recognition to what came to be terme d as the “depressed classes”. Such recognition was in the form of a protec tive regime which extended to representation in the Legislature a nd in the services under the State. Exercises in finding out the numerical strength of the depressed class in the early 20 th Century (By Southborough Committee) revealed a grim picture indicating such numbe r to be as high as 20 per cent of the majority population (Hindu) in eight (08) Indian Provinces of Madras, Bombay, Bengal, United Provinces, Punjab, Bihar and Orissa, Central Provinces and Assam. The above figure d id not include primitive or aboriginal tribes who later came to be known as the Scheduled Tribes and included in the list of Scheduled Tribes under the different Presidential Orders issued from time to time. 10. The Government of India Act, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as “1935 Act”) (also referred to as “the Constitution Act”) brought into force the expression “Scheduled Castes” for the first ti me in Indian Constitutional history. Entry 26 Part I of the First Schedule to the 1935 BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] Act stipulates that “ the Scheduled Castes mean such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within the castes, races or tribes, being castes, races, tribes, parts or groups, which appear to Hi s Majesty in Council to correspond to the classes of persons formerl y known as ‘the depressed classes’, as His Majesty in Counci l may specify ”. 11. Thereafter a Gazette Notification was published on 6 th June, 1936 promulgating the Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1936 notifying the list of castes that are to be considered as “the Scheduled Castes” across the territory of India. A look at the Schedule which consisted of nine (09) parts i.e. Madras, Bombay, Be ngal, United Provinces, Punjab, Bihar, Central Provinces, Assam, Orissa would indicate that identification of the different castes for inclusion as Scheduled Castes in the Schedule to the 1935 Act was based on an elaborate exerci se conducted for each of the Provinces so much so that while some castes have been identified as Scheduled Castes throughout a Province, others have been so identified to limited areas within a provinc e. The post constitutional exercise by the Constitution (Scheduled Castes ) Order, 1950 and the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, as originally enacted under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, was basically an exercise in re-casting the Schedule to the 1935 Act. The s ubsequent amendments to the aforesaid two Orders, from time to time, have been necessitated to bring the position in tune with the amendm ents to the First Schedule to the Constitution made at different points of time by creation of new States and alterations in the area and bounda ries of existing States. 12. Article 366 of the Constitution which defines expressions appearing in the Constitution specifically defines ‘Scheduled Ca stes’ [clause (24)] to mean “ such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are de emed under Article 341 to be Scheduled Castes for the purposes of this Constitution ”. Similarly, clause (25) of Article 366 defines “Scheduled Tribes” to mean “ such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this Constitution ”. 13. Part XVI of the Constitution of India deals with spec ial provisions relating to certain classes. Article 330 provides for reservation 541 of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the House of the People (Lok Sabha) whereas Article 332 contains similar provisions so far as the Legislative Assemblies of the States are c oncerned. Article 335 of the Constitution provides that “ the claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be take n into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to servic es and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a St ate ”. By the Constitution (Eighty-Second) Amendment Act, 2000 a proviso to Article 335 was added to provide that the members of the Scheduled Ca stes and Scheduled Tribes may be granted relaxation in qualifying marks in any examination or standards of evaluation can be lowered in matters of promotion to any class or classes of services or posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. Article 338 of t he Constitution provides for a National Commission for Scheduled Cates which is invested with the following duties: “(a) to investigate and monitor all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes under this Constitution or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the Government and to evaluate the working of such safeguards; (b) to inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes; (c) to participate and advise on the planning process of soc io- economic development of the Scheduled Castes and to evaluate the progress of their development under the Union and any State; the Scheduled Castes and to evaluate the progress of their development under the Union and any State; (d) to present to the President, annually and at such other ti mes as the Commission may deem fit, reports upon the working of those safeguards; deem fit, reports upon the working of those safeguards; (e) to make in such reports recommendations as to the measures that should be taken by the Union or any State for the effecti ve implementation of those safeguards and other measures for the protection, welfare and socio-economic development o f the Scheduled Castes; and BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] (f) to discharge such other functions in relation to the protection, welfare and development and advancement of the Schedule d Castes as the President may, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, by the rule specify.” 14. Similarly, Article 338A provides for a National Commission for Scheduled Tribes which is vested with similar duties as in the case of the Commission for the Scheduled Castes. 15. Article 341(1) of the Constitution empowers the President with respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, t o specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of the Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be. 16. In case of Scheduled Tribes the President has been similarly empowered under Article 342(1) of the Constitution. Sub-clause (2) of Article 341 and Article 342 empowers the Parliament by law to include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes specified in the Notification issued under clause (1) thereof any cas te, race or tribe/tribal community or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe/ tribal community. It is further provided that except as pr ovided i.e. by Parliament by law(s) made, the notification issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) shall not be varied by any subsequent notification. The constitutional mandate, therefore, appears to be that any cast e, race or tribe/tribal community or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe/ tribal community as has been specified in the Presidential Order under clause (1) of Article 341 or Article 342 can be altered only by Parliament by law(s) made. 17. Article 341 and Article 342 also makes it clear that the caste, race or tribe or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe as specified in the Presidential Order under Article 341(1) or a tribe or tribal community as may be specified in the Presidential Order under Article 342(1) shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tri bes for the purposes of the Constitution in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be. The above position is further made clear by clause (2) of the two Presidential Orders which are in the following terms. 543 “Clause 2 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, race s or tribes or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes sp ecified in Parts I to XXV of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which those Parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so far as regards member thereof res ident in the localities specified in relation to them in those Parts of that Schedule. Clause 2 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 2. The Tribes or tribal communities, or parts of, or groups within, tribes or tribal communities, specified in Parts I to XXII of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which those Parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes so far as regards members thereof residents in the l ocalities specified in relation to them respectively in those P arts of that Schedule.” 18. There are various parameters by which a caste/r ace is recognized as ‘ Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe’ in a State/Union Territory or a particular part thereof. There is no doubt that before the Presidential Orders were issued under Article 341(1) or under Art icle 342(1), elaborate enquiries were made and only after such enquir ies that the Presidential Orders were issued. While doing so, the Presidential Orders not only provided that even specified parts or groups of c astes, races or tribes/tribal community could be Scheduled Castes/Tribes in a particular State/Union Territory but also made it clear that certain castes or tribes or parts/groups thereof could be Scheduled Castes/Tribes only in specified/particular areas/districts of a State/Uni on Territory. The reason for such an exercise by reference to specific area s of a State is that judged by standards of educational, social backwardness, etc. races or tribes may not stand on the same footing throughout the State . The consideration for specifying a particular caste or tribe or class for inclusion in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or Backward Classes in any given State depends on the nature and extent of the disadvantages and social hardships suffered by the concerned members of the class in that State. These may be absent in another State to which t he persons belonging to some other State may migrate. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] 19. 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, perhaps, on the limited ground as held in M. Nagaraj and othersvs. Union of India and others 7. A few illustrations may clarify the position. The question whether Dohar caste is a sub-caste of Chamar caste which is recognized as a scheduled caste came up for consideration in Bhaiya Lal vs. Harikishan Singh 8. This Court held that the court cannot enquire into wheth er Dohar caste is a sub-caste of Chamar caste and whether the same must be deemed to have been included in the Presidential Order. In Bhaiya Lal (supra) , this Court held that before issuing notifications under Articles 341 and 342, an elaborate enquiry is made and as a result of the enquiry social justice is sought to be done to the castes, races or tribes as may appear to be necessary. It was further h eld that only Parliament is empowered to amend the Notification under Articles 341(2) and 342(2) of the Constitution, as is underlined by the expression “but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said cl ause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification ” occurring in each of the said provisions. In Bhaiya Lal ( supra ),this Court held as under:- “10...The object of Article 341(1) plainly is to provide additional protection to the members of the Scheduled Castes having regard to the economic and educational backwardness from which they suffer. It is obvious that in specifying castes, races or tri bes, the President has been expressly authorised to limit the notification to parts of or groups within the castes, races or tribes, and that must mean that after examining the educational and socia l backwardness of a caste, race or tribe, the President ma y well come to the conclusion that not the whole caste, race or tribe but parts of or groups within them should be specified. Similarly, the President can specify castes, races or tribes or parts thereof in relation not only to the entire State, but in relation to parts of the State where he is satisfied that the examination of the social and educational are backwardness of the race, caste or tribe justifies such specification. In fact, it is well known that before a notification is issued under Article 341(1), an elaborate enquiry is made and it is as a result of this enquiry that social justice is sought to be done to the castes, races or tribes as may appear to be necess ary, and 545 in doing justice, it would obviously be expedient not only to specify parts or groups of castes, races or tribes, but to make th e said specification by reference to different areas in th e State. Educational and social backwardness in regard to these castes, races or tribes may not be uniform or of the same intensity in the whole of the State; it may vary in degree or in kind in diffe rent areas and that may justify the division of the State into convenient and suitable areas for the purpose of issuing the public notification in question ...” [Underlining added] 20. Whenever States’ reorganization had taken place in the past, Parliament had exercised its powers under Article 341(2) and Ar ticle 342(2) and provided for specific Castes/Tribes that were entitled to be recognised as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in relation to the reorganized States/Union Territories. The Scheme of the C onstitution (Scheduled Castes) and (Scheduled Tribes) Orders makes it cl ear that Parliament’s intention was to extend the benefits of reservation in relation to the States/Union Territories only to the castes, races or tribes as mentioned in the Presidential Orders. 21. The Orders of 1950 was amended by the Constitut ion (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order), by the Ame ndment Act, 1956 (Act 63/1956). Another amending Act was e nacted by parliament in 1976. Earlier, orders had been made for the first time in relation to certain territories, such as the Constitution (Anda man and Nicobar Islands) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1959. Further, amendments had taken place as and when parliament reorganized state s, through separate Reorganisation Acts, which led to large scale modificat ion of the Presidential Orders. Illustratively, when new S tates/Union Territories were formed such as, Nagaland, Pondicherry, or Sikkim, the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes Orders were made in relation to the new States/Union Territories, for instance, the Constitution (Nagaland) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1970- after the reorganisation of As sam; the Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Castes Order, 1978; the Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1978) upon creation of the S tate of Sikkim; the recent ones being upon creation of the States of Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand. Likewise, when previou s Union Territories (such as Goa, Mizoram and Arunachal Pra desh) were BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] constituted into States, consequential amendments were made t o the Scheduled Castes and Tribes Orders. All such amendments/enactments were made by Parliament. 22. Though in a different context i.e. in relation to Backward Classes this Court in M.C.D. v. Veena and Ors.9, has specifically held that migrants are not entitled for reservation as Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the States/Union Territories where they have migrated. The relevant portion of the judgment that may be noticed is as hereunder:- “6. Castes or groups are specified in relation to a given Stat e or Union Territory, which obviously means that such caste would include caste belonging to an OBC group in relation to that State or Union Territory for which it is specified. The matters that are to be taken into consideration for specifying a particular caste in a particular group belonging to OBCs would depend on the nature and extent of disadvantages and social hardships suffered by that caste or group in that State. However, it may not be so in another State to which a person belonging thereto goes by migration. I t may also be that a caste belonging to the same nomenclature i s specified in two States but the considerations on the basis of which they had been specified may be totally different. So the degree of disadvantages of various elements which constitute the data for specification may also be entirely different. Thus, merely because a given caste is specified in one State as belonging to OBCs does not necessarily mean that if there be another group belonging to the same nomenclature in another State, a person belonging to that group is entitled to the rights, privileges and benefits admissible to the members of that caste. These aspects have to be borne in mind in interpreting the provisions of the Constitution with reference to application of reservation to OBCs.” 23. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra) had the occasion to consider the question as to whet her a member of the Gouda community which is recognised as “ Scheduled Tribe ” in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 for the State of Andhra Pradesh would be entitled to admission in a medical institution situated in the State of Maharashtra. This Court noticed the fact that the father of the petitioner in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra) was an employee in Fertilizer Corporation of India, a public sector undertaking and thereafter in Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilize rs Limited, a 547 Government of India undertaking. He belonged to the Gouda community, a recognized Scheduled Tribe of Andhra Pradesh. On his appointment he was stationed at Bombay. The petitioner came to Bombay at the age of nine years. He completed his studies in Bombay; he subm itted an application for his admission in the medical institutions run by Bombay Municipal Corporation which was denied. This denial of admission was based on the Government of India circular dated 22 nd February, 1985, according to which a person who migrates from one State to another is entitled to the benefit of being Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in the State of origin and not in the State to which he or she migrates . The appellant was held not entitled to be admitted to the Medical College on the basis that he belonged to a Scheduled Tribe in his original State i.e. Andhra Pradesh. 24. After referring to various provisions of the Constitution of India, the background in which the Presidential Orders were issued and several earlier judgments of this Court, it was held as under:- “9. It appears that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in some States had to suffer the social disadvantages and did not have the facilities for development and growth. It is, therefor e, necessary in order to make them equal in those areas where they have so suffered and are in the state of underdevelopment t o have reservations or protection in their favour so that they c an compete on equal terms with the more advantageous or developed sections of the community. Extreme social and econo mic backwardness arising out of traditional practices of untouchability is normally considered as criterion for including a community in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The soci al conditions of a caste, however, varies from State to Stat e and it will not be proper to generalise any caste or any tri be as a Scheduled Tribe or Scheduled Caste for the whole country . This, however, is a different problem whether a member or the Scheduled Caste in one part of the country who migrates to another State or any other Union territory should continue to be treated a s a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in which he has migrated. That question has to be judged taking into consideration the interest and well-being of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the country as a whole.” [underlining is ours] BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] 25. In Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra) , rejecting the contention that a member of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes should get the benefit of the status ‘ for the purpose of the Constitution throughout the territory of India ’, it was observed that if such contention is to be accepted the expression “ In relation of that State ” would become nugatory. 26. Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra)was followed by another Constitution Bench of this Court in Action Committee (supra). After referring to Articles 14, 15(1), 15(4), 16(4) and 19 and Part XVI of the Constitution of India and the decisions governing the field and also Articles 341 and 342 , it was held as under:- “3. On a plain reading of clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 it is manifest that the power of the President is limited to speci fying the castes or tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or a Union Territory, as the case may be. Once a notification is issued under clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, Parliament can by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, specified in the notification, any caste or tribe but save for that limited purpose the notification issued under clause (1), shall not be varied by any subsequent notification. What is important to notice is that the castes or tribes have to be specified in relation to a given State or Union Territory. That means a given caste or tribe can be a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to the State or Union Territory for which it is specified. These are the rel evant provisions with which we shall be concerned while dealing with the grievance made in this petition. .... 16.We may add that considerations for specifying a particular caste or tribe or class for inclusion in the list of Scheduled Castes/ Schedule Tribes or backward classes in a given State would depend on the nature and extent of disadvantages and social hardships suffered by that caste, tribe or class in that State whi ch may be totally non est in another State to which persons belonging thereto may migrate. Coincidentally it may be that a caste or tribe bearing the same nomenclature is specified in two States bu t the considerations on the basis of which they have been specifie d 549 may be totally different. So also the degree of disadvanta ges of various elements which constitute the input for specification may also be totally different. Therefore, merely because a given caste is specified in State A as a Scheduled Caste does not necessarily mean that if there be another caste bearing the same nomenclature in another State the person belonging to the former would be entitled to the rights, privileges and benefits admissible to a member of the Scheduled Caste of the latter State “for the purpo ses of this Constitution”. This is an aspect which has to be kept in mind and which was very much in the minds of the Constitution-makers as is evident from the choice of language of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution....” [underlining is ours] 27. Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra)and Action Committee (supra) were followed in Subhash Chandra and another (supra). After referring to various judgments on the point and also the various circulars, this Court in Subhash Chandra and another (supra) held as under:- “69. Both the Central Government and the State Government indisputably may lay down a policy decision in regard to reservation having regard to Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India but such a policy cannot violate other constitutional provisions. A policy cannot have primacy over the constitutional scheme. If for the purposes of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India, State and the Union Territory are on a par on the g round of administrative exigibility ( sic ) or in exercise of the administrative power, the constitutional interdict contained in clause (2) of Article 341 or clause (2) of Article 342 of the Constitution of India cannot be got rid of. ....... 75. If a caste or tribe is notified in terms of the Scheduled Castes Order or the Scheduled Tribes Order, the same must be done in terms of clause (1) of Article 341 as also that of Article 342 of the Constitution of India, as the case may be. No deviation from the procedure laid down therein is permissible in law. If any amendment/alteration thereto is required to be made, recourse to the procedure laid down under clause (2) thereof must be resorted to.” BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] 28. In Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra) , the Constitution Bench observed that the expression “ in relation to that State ”must be read meaningfully and harmoniously. It was observed that if a member of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes gets the benefit of that status throughout the territory of India, the expression “ in relation to that State ”would become nugatory. If the special privileges or the r ights granted to scheduled castes or scheduled tribes in a particular State are to be made available in all the States and if such benefit s are to be carried from State ‘A’ to State ‘B’ on migration, the mandate of Article 341/342 would get compromised. Such a consequence must be avoided for it is a fundamental rule of interpretation, be it of a statutory enactment or of the Constitution, that wherever and whenever there is a co nflict between two provisions, the same should be so interpreted as to give effect to both. “…….Nothing is surplus in a Constitution and n o part should be made nugatory…..”. [ Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra)] 29. The issue has to be viewed from another perspective. If a member of a Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe of Andhra Pradesh who had migrated to Maharashtra is to be given the benefit of reservation it will amount to depriving a member of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe of Maharashtra by reducing the reservation earmarked for them. It is in this context, in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao (supra), thatthe Constitution Bench observed as under:- “14. ....But having regard to the purpose, it appears to us tha t harmonious construction enjoins that we should give to each expression —”in relation to that State” or “for the purpos es of this Constitution” — its full meaning and give their full e ffect. This must be so construed that one must not negate the other. The construction that reservation made in respect of the Scheduled Caste or Tribe of that State is so determined to be entitle d to all the privileges and rights under the Constitution in that State would be the most correct way of reading, consistent with the language, purpose and scheme of the Constitution. Otherwise, one has to bear in mind that if reservations to those who are trea ted as Scheduled Caste or Tribe in Andhra Pradesh are also given to a boy or a girl who migrates and gets deducted ( sic inducted) in the State of Maharashtra or other States where that caste or tribe is not treated as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe then eithe r reservation will have the effect of depriving the percentage to the 551 member of that caste or tribe in Maharashtra who would be entitled to protection or it would denude the other non-Scheduled Castes or non-Scheduled Tribes in Maharashtra to the proportion that they are entitled to. This cannot be logical or correct result designed by the Constitution.” 30. 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 of India would mean that the benefits of reservation provide d for by the Constitution would stand confined to the geographical territorie s of a State/Union Territory in respect of which the lists of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes have been notified by the Presidential Orders issued from time to time. A person notified as a Scheduled Caste in State ‘A’ cannot claim the same status in another State on the basis that he is declared as a Scheduled Caste in State ‘A’. 31. In S. Pushpa (supra) ,thePondicherry Government had appointed Selection Grade Teachers in 1995 under the Scheduled Castes quota from amongst the scheduled castes candidates registe red in the employment exchange in Pondicherry but also extended the benefit of reservation to scheduled castes candidates of other States and Union Territories. The Chennai Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (“CAT” for short) quashed the selection process holding that mi grant Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates could not be considered for appointment for posts within the union territory of Pondicherr y. In S.Pushpa (supra)the issue was with regard to the extent of benefit that Scheduled Castes candidates of other States/Union Territories would be entitled to in Pondicherry. This Court held that in the matter of providing reservation, it was open to the Pondicherry Government to a pply or adopt a policy to give the benefit of reservation to mi grant Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In paragraphs 17 and 21 in S.Pushpa (supra), it was held as under: “17.We do not find anything inherently wrong or any infraction of any constitutional provision in such a policy. The principle enunciated in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao cannot have application here as UT of Pondicherry is not a State. As shown above, a Union BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] Territory is administered by the President through an Administrator appointed by him . In the context of Article 246, Union Territories are excluded from the ambit of the expression “State” occurring therein. This was clearly explained by a Constitution Bench i n T.M. Kanniyan v. ITO . In New Delhi Municipal Council v. State of Punjab the majority has approved the ratio of T.M. Kanniyan and has held that the Union Territories are not States for the purpose of Part XI of the Constitution (para 145). The Tribunal has, therefore, clearly erred in applying the ratio of Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao in setting aside the selection and appointment of migrant SC candidates. (underlining is ours) *** *** *** 21. ....Article 16(4) is not controlled by a Presidential Order issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) of the Constitution in the sense that reservation in the matter of appointment on posts may be made in a State or Union Territory only for such Schedul ed Castes and Scheduled Tribes which are mentioned in the Schedule appended to the Presidential Order for that particular Stat e or Union Territory. This article does not say that only such Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes which are mentioned in the Presidential Order issued for a particular State alone w ould be recognised as backward classes of citizens and none else. If a State or Union Territory makes a provision whereunder the benefit of reservation is extended only to such Scheduled Caste s or Scheduled Tribes which are recognised as such in relation to that State or Union Territory then such a provision would be perfectly valid. However, there would be no infraction of clause (4) of Article 16 if a Union Territory by virtue of its peculiar position being governed by the President as laid down in Article 239 extends the benefit of reservation even to such migrant Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes who are not mentioned in the Schedule to the Presidential Order issued for such Union Territory. The UT o f Pondicherry having adopted a policy of the Central Government whereunder all Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, irrespective of their State are eligible for posts which are reserved for SC/ST candidates, no legal infirmity can be ascribed to such a policy and the same cannot be held to be contrary to any provision of law.” 553 32. 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. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes thus specified in relation to a State or a Union Territory does not carry the same status in another State or Union Territory. Any expansion/deletion of the list of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes by any authority except Parliament would be against the constitutional mandate under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India. 33. Article 16(4) is an enabling provision. It enables the State to provide to backward classes including Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes reservation in appointments to public services. Such reservation is to be provided on the basis of quantifiable data indicating the adequacy or inadequacy, as may be, of the representation of suc h classes in Government service. The data which is the basis of the satisfaction of the State being verifiable, is open to judicial scrutiny on the limited ground of relevance of the circumstances on which the satisfaction is moulded. The policy decision to provide reservation, of course, is beyond the pale of judicial review. 34. It is an unquestionable principle of interpreta tion that interrelated statutory as well as constitutional provisio ns have to be harmoniously construed and understood so as to avoid making an y provision nugatory and redundant. If the list of Scheduled Caste s/ Scheduled Tribes in the Presidential Orders under Article 341/342 is subject to alteration only by laws made by Parliament, operation of the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes beyond the clas ses or categories enumerated under the Presidential Order for a particular State/ Union Territory by exercise of the enabling power vested by Article 16(4) would have the obvious effect of circumventing the spe cific constitutional provisions in Articles 341/342. In this regard, it must also be noted that the power under Article 16(4) is not only capable of being exercised by a legislative provision/enactment but also by an Executive Order issued under Article 166 of the Constitution. It will, therefore, be in consonance with the constitutional scheme to understand the enabling provision under Article 16(4) to be available to provide reservation only to the classes or categories of Scheduled Castes/Sche duled Tribes BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] enumerated in the Presidential orders for a particu lar State/Union Territory within the geographical area of that State and not beyond. If in the opinion of a State it is necessary to extend the benefit of reservation to a class/category of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes beyond those specified in the Lists for that particular State, constitutiona l discipline would require the State to make its views in the matter prevail with the central authority so as to enable an appropriate parliamentary exercise to be made by an amendment of the Lists of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for that particular State. Unilateral action b y States on the touchstone of Article 16(4) of the Constitution could be a possible trigger point of constitutional anarchy and therefore must be held to be impermissible under the Constitution. 35. The decision in S. Pushpa (supra) may now be taken up to understand the basis on which the conclusion recorded therei n was recorded. In S. Pushpa (supra) a distinction was found by this Court in the constitutional status of a Union Territory and a State in relation to the Union/Central Government. The provisions of Article 239 and 239A of the Constitution; Section 3(8) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 defining ‘Central Government’ and the provisions of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 were considered to arrive at the following conclusion: “14. The effect of these provisions is also that the Administrator (Lt Governor of Pondicherry) and his Council of Ministers a ct under the general control of and are under an obligation to comply with any particular direction issued by the President. Further, the Administrator (Lt Governor of Pondicherry) while acting under the scope of the authority given to him under Article 239 of the Constitution would be the Central Government.” 36. It is on the aforesaid basis that the concerned Notific ation/ Government Order dated 16 th February, 1974 by which it was provided that Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates from outside the Union Territory of Pondicherry should also be considered for appointment to posts reserved for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes i n the Union Territory Administration and the communication of the Government of India dated 6 th October, 1995 to the same effect were upheld. 37. The First Schedule to the Constitution, as original en acted, provided for three (03) categories of States i.e. Part ‘A’, Part ‘B’ and 555 Part ‘C’ States to comprise the territory of India. The States Reorganization Act, 1956 and the consequential Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956 drastically altered the provisions of t he First Schedule to the Constitution by establishment of new States; alteration in the area and boundaries of existing States and also by abolition of the three (03) categories of States; and by classification of certain areas as Union Territories. Pursuant thereto the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 was enacted to provide for Legislative Assemblies and Councils of Ministers for certain Union Territories and for certain other incidental matters. It will not be necessary to specifically deal with the provisions of the aforesaid Act in any great detail except to say that in course of time most of the Union Territories (except for Pondicherry), which had been provided with their own Legislatures and Councils of Min isters have graduated to become full-fledged States on the basis of enactment of several State Reorganisation Acts details of which have been mentioned (para 21). The Union Territory of Pondicherry, as on date, stands out as sole Union Territory which has a Legislature and Council of Ministers, apart from Delhi. 38. Delhi, which was one of the original Union Territories, came to be called as “National Capital Territory of Delhi”. This change was introduced by the Constitution (Sixty-Ninth Amendment) Act, 1991 with effect from 1 st February, 1992 by insertion of Article 239-AA in Part VIII of the Constitution (i.e. Special provisions with respect to Delhi). Article 239-AA(3)(a) empower the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi to make laws with respect to a ny matters enumerated in the State List or in the Concurrent List (i.e . List II and List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India) subject to certain exceptions. It is here that the Union Territory of Delhi i.e. National Capital Territory of Delhi is enjoined a special status inasmuch as power to enact laws on any of the subjects in List II and List III is a constitutional conferment as opposed to the position in the erstwhile Union Territories and the present day Union Territory of Pondicherry where the power to frame/make laws has been conferred on the Union Territory Legislatures by a Parliamentary enactment i.e. Section 18 of the Governm ent of Union Territories Act, 1963. The above narration has been considered necessary only to make the discussion complete. We make it clear that we are not entering into any discussion as to the special position/status of Delhi, if any, by virtue of the provisions contained in Article 239AA as the said issue does not arise for consideration in the present reference. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] 39. The above view coupled with the scope and ambit of the present reference may also not require us to go into the corr ectness of the view expressed by this Court in paragraph 14 of the decis ion in S. Pushpa (supra) (as already extracted). The resolution of the question formulated for an answer is capable of being reached by adopting an entirely different perspective which we intend to do hereinafter. 40. The federal nature of the Constitution finds broad manifestation in two principal areas i.e. division of legislative power a nd exercise thereof by the Union and the constituent States and secondly, which is more relevant and important to the subject in hand, is the constitutional provisions relating to services under the Union and the State s as dealt with in Part XIV of the Constitution. 41. The subject finds an elaborate study by Dr. D.D. Basu i n “Commentary on the Constitution of India” 10 . According to Dr. D.D. Basu, “ In India though the Union and the States have their ow n public services, (vide Entry 70 of List I and Entry 41 of List II) there is no clear-cut bifurcation in the administration of the Union and the State laws as in the U.S.A. The State officials administer the State laws as well the Union laws applicable within that Sate whereas the members of the Union Services while workin g within a State, also carry out State laws, insofar as they may be applicable. The second peculiarity of the Indian federal system of administration is that though the federal and State Governments have ci vil services of their own to manage their own households, there a re certain services known as the All-India Services, which are common to both the federal and State Governments. The organisation of the Civil services in the Indian f ederal system may be demonstrated as thus: All India Services Central Civil Services S tate Civil Services Central Secretariat Services” Subordinate Ser vices 42. At the State Level, as Dr. D.D. Basu points out, “the State Civil Services administer the subject solely belongin g to the State Governments, according to the federal distribution of su bjects thus including the Judicial, Executive, Medical, Enginee ring, Police, 10 8th Edition, 2011, Volume 9, Page 9858 557 Education branches. Their members are under the exc lusive control of the respective State Governments and thei r duties are confined to the territories of the State by which th ey have been appointed, unless sent on deputation to the Union Gove rnment ”.11 These State Civil Services may be Administrative Services, Forest Services etc. [illustratively, in case of Himachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh Administrative Service (HPAS) is a type of ser vice, so is, Himachal Pradesh Forest Service (HPFS). The recruitment to these services is conducted by way of Civil Services Examinations organised by the State-specific Public Service Commission e.g. in case of Himachal Pradesh, it is Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission. As stated earlier, persons inducted into the State Service of a parti cular State cannot be transferred to any other State. These officers are concerned with only the affairs of the state in which they are appoint ed. These services (like HPAS, HPFS) may, for convenience, be called as Superior Services/Higher Services with reference to a S tate. But in addition to these higher services, there are also services that may, again for convenience, be called as Subordinate Services/Lower Level Job s. The posts in these services are like those of Clerks, Sc hool Teachers; Drivers, Attendants, Safai Workers, etc. For the purpose of recruitment of Subordinate Servants, states have in place State-specific Selection Commissions . 43. At the Federal Level, civil administration is carried out by the members of – (1) All India Services (specifically provided for in Article 312); (2) Central Civil Services (although, not specifically provided for in the Constitution but are regulated by creation of statutory Rules framed under the proviso to Article 309). The se are again Superior Services and the selection/recruitment is by the Union Public Service Commission. ALL INDIA SERVICES There are three All India Services (AIS) – (a) Indian Administrative Service (IAS); (b) Indian Forest Service (IFoS); (c) Indian Police Service (IPS). As regards AIS, Dr. D.D. Basu 12 says that, “the peculiarity of the AIS from the federal standpoint is that – (a) Though they are recruited and their conditions of ser vice are determined by the Union Government, they have to admi nister 11 8th Edition, Volume 9, 2011, Page 9860. 12 8th Edition, 2011, Volume 9, Page 9858. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] both Union and the State subjects, accordingly as their services are placed at the disposal of the Union or a State Gove rnment, in connection with the affairs of the Union or the State, as the case may be. (b) While serving in a State, they are controlled by th e State Government, except as regards the imposition of the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement, which can b e awarded only by the Union Government. (c) In a sense, this system is an exception to the usu al federal precedent inasmuch as it is intended to fill up the strategic posts both under the Union and State Governments by men of s uperior calibre, recruited on a uniform basis, through the UPSC. Thus, while a Deputy Collector may be a member of the State Civil S ervice, the Additional Collector and the Collector may be membe rs of the Indian Administrative Service. The category of AIS thus breaks through the federal division so far as the administrative s ervices in India are concerned. In fact, the principal agents of a Sate administration are members of the AIS and it would be a mi stake to suppose that the AIS exist for the administration o f the Union subjects. Broadly, speaking, the administration of a State is run both by the members of the AIS and State Services, the latter supplying only the intermediate and subordinate tiers. (d) Though the bulk of recruitment to the AIS is by competitive examination, a certain proportion is se lected by promotion from amongst members of the State Civil Servic es. (e) Though a member of AIS may be required to serve anywhere in India, on recruitment, he is usually assig ned to a State or States jointly, or, in a technical language, is inc luded in a State cadre or Joint cadre and continues to serve there until or unless he is called upon to serve the Union Government, in an y of its Departments. (f) While employed under a State, again, the members of the AIS do not have to work only in the Secretariat of the St ate but also in the Districts as already stated and members of thes e services are expected to acquire experience of the business in th e district as well as Secretariat administration and there is a c onstant 559 interchange of officers between the Secretariat and t he Districts, just as there is such an interchange between the States and the Union Secretariats on the other hand. ” 44. Therefore, the members of the All India Service s are common to the Union and the States and they serve, by turn, both the Union and State Governments. The members of these services although recruited by the Centre their services are placed under va rious State cadres. “ It is evident from Article 312(1) that the members of t he AIS are common to the Union and the States. Curiously, however, there is a cadre for the Indian Administrative Service only in the States, according to the Indian Administrative Serv ice (Cadre) Rules, 1954 and there is no separate cadre for membe rs of this service in the Government of India. Each members of th e Indian Administrative Service therefore, belongs to the cadre of one State or the other .” 13 45. There are many State Cadres e.g. Bihar Cadre, Rajastha n Cadre and Joint Cadres like AGMUT (for Arunachal Pradesh + Goa + Mizoram + the 7 Union Territories). These officers r emain in the allotted Cadres till they retire. They are not normally to be transferred from one State Cadre to another State Cadre though they have the accountability to serve both under the State and the Centre. 46. At this juncture, the Union of India’s Affidavit may also be referred to, which states with reference to AIS that, “ the conditions of service of these services (AIS) are regulated by the DoPT by way of executive and statutory instructions, statutory rul es formulated under Article 309 of the Constitution and Act of Parliament etc. The functional control of some of the services rests with other Ministries and Departments also. The Ministry of Home Affairs exercises functional control on IPS and the Ministry of Envir onment & Forest & Climate Change exercises functional control on IFoS. Members of these services are allocated a cadre under a State or Union Territory and they serve the Union as well as the State, whichever is allotted to them. Thus their services are All India Services. Their recruitment is by the Union Public Service Commission and as they serve the Union as well as the States, their recruitment is on pan India basis. Every citizen of this country having the required qualification is eligible to be considere d for the 13 D.D. Basu, 8 th Edition, 2011, Volume 9, Page 10585. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] appointment. It is pertinent to note that before selec tion in the AIS, there is no specification or indication of the cadre in U nion, Union Territory or State, which they may serve. Upon selection alone, they would be allocated cadre depending upon the merit a nd the preferences they would have made at the time of appl ying. Upon selection they could be allocated to serve through a ny of the 25 states or 7 Union Territories of Delhi; Puducherry; Chandigarh; Daman & Diu; Dadra & Nagar Haveli; Andaman & Nicoba r; Lakshadweep coupled with the states of Arunachal Pra desh, Goa and Mizoram ”14 . 47. CENTRAL CIVIL SERVICES The Central Civil Services (CCS), as Dr. D.D. Basu point s out, “are engaged in administering the Union subjects, such as the Posts and Telegraphs, Customs and Excise, Income Tax. In shor t, these constitute all the administrative services in the Centra l Departments which have not so far been included in the list of All In dia Services. They are under the exclusive control of the Union G overnment. Besides the Central Services, there are other Services intended for work solely in the Central Secretariat, or, in other word s, those who are to manage the offices of the Central Departments . Both the Central Civil Services and Central Secretariat Serv ices are sub-divided into Class I, II, III, IV, (= Group A, B, C, D 15 ) according to the rank and responsibilities of the o fficers… Members of the Central Services are also sent on tr ansfer or deputation to States where offices relating to the Un ion subjects or Public Sector Undertakings relating thereto are located .”16 All that we would like to add is that though the members of these ser vices are concerned only with the affairs of the Union/Centre they discharge such duties in the offices and establishments of the Union Gover nment as 14 Para 5 of the Affidavit. 15 Rule 6A of the Central Civil Services (Classificati on, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 provides that, “ All reference to Central Civil Services/Central Civil Posts, Class I, Class II, Class III and Class IV in all Rules, O rders, Schedules, Notifications, Regulations, Instructions in force, immediately before the commencement of these rules shall be construed as references to Central Civil S ervices/Central Civil Posts, Group ‘A’, Group ‘B’, Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ respectively, and any reference to “Class or Classes” therein in this context shall be construed as reference to “Group or Groups”, as the case may be.” 16 8th Edition. Volume 9, Page 9859. 561 may be located in the States and the Union Territories. T he Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 [CCS Rules, 1965] (enacted under the proviso to Article 309) are the governing statutory Rules with reference to these service s. Rule 4 of CCS Rules, 1965 classifies the Central Civil Services into four types – (i) Central Civil Services, Group A (45 services as pe r the Schedule to the Rules); (ii) Central Civil Services, Group B (33 services as pe r the Schedule to the Rules); (iii) Central Civil Services, Group C (5 services as per the Schedule to the Rules); (iv) Central Civil Services, Group D (1 serviceas p er the Schedule to the Rules) 17 . 48. CCS Group A : The Affidavit of the Union of India says that, “ recruitment to Group A services is made by UPSC. The recruitment is again on all India basis. This is the reason the personnel belongin g to these 45 services work in the posts of Union and the Union Terr itories (UT) across the length and breadth of the country. The Cadre Controlling Authority of Group A services are the respective mini stries of the Government of India. For example, the first service being the Archaeological Service, the Cadre Controlling Autho rity is the Ministry of Culture, Central Government. Another exa mple, the 12 th service being the Indian Foreign Service and this is c ontrolled by Ministry of External Affairs. No. 16 is the Indian Revenue Service and it is controlled by the Ministry of Finance. The members of these services being recruited pursuant to the Central Service Exams conducted by the UPSC are allocated to the respectiv e services. Whichever Ministry seeks recruitment to the service in this Group, sends requisition to UPSC as per procedure prescribed and UPSC accordingly advertises for the post in Group A. Ever y citizen of India is eligible to apply as per the qualifications and re quirements in the notification. DOPT is the nodal Ministry for regul ating the conditions of service of all Central Civil Services a s per Allocation of Business Rules. As per the conditions of service, every employee 17 Para 6 of the Affidavit. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] is required to give an undertaking agreeing to the conditi ons of all India transfer liability at the time of joining service. Central Civil Services employees belonging to Group A serve the Unio n of India and that is the reason why these services are across t he length and breadth of the country, wherever there is an office o f the Central Government. Member of the Groups A service are governe d by CCS Rules of 1965 as well as Central Civil Services (Co nduct) Rules 1972; Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972 and suc h other Rules made by the Central Ministries. ” 49. CCS Group B : As mentioned earlier, there are 33 Group B Services. Amongst these, are the Union Territory Services listed at No. 28 and No. 29 and known as the ‘Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service’ abbreviated as ‘DANICS’ and ‘Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Police Service’ (Grade II) abbreviated as ‘DANIPS’. Wh ile at this stage we may have also a look at Union Territory services i n some detail. UNION TERRITORY SERVICES 50. The Government of India (Ministry of Home Affairs) by way of a notification dated 6 th August, 2003, and in the exercise of the proviso to Article 309, enacted ‘the National Capital Territory of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Havel (Civil Service) Rules, 2003 [DANICS Rules, 2003]. As also, ‘the National Capital Territory of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Have l (Police Service) Rules, 2003 [DANIPS Rules, 2003]. 51. The DANICS/DANIPS Rules, 2003 define:- · ‘Administration ’ to mean the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi in respect National Capital Territory of Delhi and Union Territory Administration in respect of the Union Territories of – Andaman & Nicobar Islands; Lakshadweep; Daman & Diu; Da dra & Nagar Haveli [under Rule 2(a)] · ‘Commission ’ to mean the Union Public Service Commission [under Rule 2(h)]. 563 · ‘Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ’ to have the same meaning as are assigned to them by Articles 366(24) and 366(25) [under Rule 2(n)]. The DANICS/DANIPS Rules, 2003, further, state that posts in Junior Administrative Grade-I, Junior Administrative Grade-II, Selection Grade will be Central Civil Services (Group A), whereas Entry Grade shall be Central Civil Services (Group B) [Rule 3]. The vacancies in DANICS/DANIPS shall be filled in on the basis of the Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC [Rule 7]. Every member of DANICS/ DANIPS allocated to an Administration shall be posted against a duty post 18 under the Administration by the Administrator [Rule 12]. Mo re importantly, the Government of India shall, from time to time, allocate a member of DANICS/DANIPS to any Administration for posting [Rule 12]. Nothing in the Rules affects reservations, relaxation i n age-limit and other concessions required to be provided for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and ot her special categories of persons in accordance with the orders i ssued by the Government of India from time to time in this regard [Rule 17: the Saving clause]. The Sanctioned Strength for DANICS and DANIPS is in the DANICS/DANIPS Rules, 2003 (approximately 398 DANICS ; approximately 355 DANIPS). 52. As per the Union of India’s Affidavit, DANICS and DANIPS are ‘Union Territory Services’ 19 . The Affidavit says, “ ...at Serial 28 and 29 of the Schedule (to CCS Rules, 1965), we have the Uni on Territory Services known as DANICS and DANIPS”. The Af fidavit, further, says that, “DANICS/DANIPS Officers are post ed in Delhi; Andaman & Nicobar Islands; Lakshadweep; Daman & Diu; Dadra & Nagar Haveli. The recruitment to all the Union Terri tories for these Group B posts are common. They are also central ised and the Appointing Authority is none other than the Ministry of Home Affairs (Joint Secretary). For the recruitment to these services, it is 18 Duty Posts are mentioned in the Schedule to these R ules. To name a few, these are - Joint Director of Social Welfare/Delhi; Joint Director of Education/Delhi; Deputy Medial Superintendent of Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narain Hosp ital/Delhi; Registrar of Cooperative Societies/Port Blair; Assistant Commiss ioner of Police/Delhi; Deputy Superintendent of Police/Andaman & Nicobar; Chief of Police/Dadra & Nagar Haveli etc. 19 Page 4, Para (ii)(a) of the Affidavit. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] the very same examination meant for AIS and CCS Group A. Any citizen of India is eligible to apply, subject to the conditions prescribed. As per the Service Rules, transfer undertakings thr oughout the Union Territories covered under DANICS/DANIPS is tak en from these officers. This is the reason why the Union of India while inviting applications for recruitment considers all candidat es, including reserved candidates on all India basis. Group B Cadre of DAN ICS/ DANIPS is the Feeder Cadre for IAS and IPS respectiv ely (i.e. AIS). They retire invariably in these Offices, some of them re aching high positions in the Central Government. Recruitment to AIS; CCS Group A; CCS Group B (Gazetted) is conducted through UPSC. In the Civil Services Examination, the applicants are com mon when the applications are made. Every aspirant seeks recruit ment to the services and it is only as per the marks and ranking that allocations are made eventually to AIS; CCS Group A; CCS Group B. Therefore, when UPSC undertakes the recruitment, it is naturally a pan India recruitment and therefore, it is necessary to seek applications including from reserved candidates from all over India .”20 53. But it is not the Members of the All India Services (AGMUT Cadre); Central Civil Services (Group ‘A’ and ‘B’) and the ‘DANICS’ and ‘DANIPS’ who alone are the public servants in the Stat es and the Union Territories engaged in the discharge of duties in connection with the affairs of the Union. There are and bound to be public servants that work the subordinate services. CCS Group C : 54. At the subordinate level these are the Group ‘C’ posts. In the Schedule to CCS Rules, 1965, there are 5 such services. The Union of India’s Affidavit says that, “ These posts, in so far, as they relate to services under the Union of India are concerned are rec ruited by the Staff Selection Commission (which is the Recrui ting Agency under the DoPT). The members of CCS Group C get promo ted to CCS Group B. Recruitment to posts in this group ari se out of requisition made by the concerned ministries all over Indi a. These requisitions, upon reaching, the Staff Selection Com mission are processed and selection takes place and appointments are made. Even from these appointees, undertaking for all Ind ia transfer 20 Page 4, 5 of the Affidavit 565 liability is taken. As these are posts under the Central Government and these employees are liable to transferred anywhere in the country and the recruitment being centralised for all such posts in the country, it has been consistent policy of the Union of India to have pan India eligibility .” 55. With regard to CCS Group D posts, in the affidavit of the Union it is stated that “ the posts under this category are primarily of what used to be Class IV employees now referred t o as the Multi Tasking staff. In recent years, Central Pay C ommission has recommended against any further recruitment to these posts in Group D. Further it has also been recommended t hat the existing posts will be merged with Group C. Hence, this i s now a vanishing cadre 21 .” 56. The broad picture that emanates from the above discussi on and narration is that insofar as the services in connection with the affairs of the Union is concerned (Central Services), wherever the establishment may be located i.e. in the National Capital Territory of Delhi or in a State or within the geographical areas of Union Territory, recruitment to all positions is on an All India basis and reservation provided for is again a pan- India reservation. This by itself, from one perspective, may appear to be in departure from the rule set out in Part XVI of the Constitution of India (Articles 341 and 342). However, the close look under taken hereinbefore indicates such a position is fully in accord with the constitutional structure of a federal polity. NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI 57. In case of National Capital Territory of Delhi, espec ially, to make the picture even clearer, a reference may be made to ‘Delhi Administration Subordinate Service Rules, 1967’. Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules is to the following effect: “3. Constitution of service and its classification.- (1) On and from the date of commencement of these Rules, there shall be constituted one Central Civil Service, known as the Subordinate Service of the Delhi Administration . (2) The Service shall have four Grades, namely— 21 Page 6, para iv.a. of the Affidavit BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] Grade I Grade II Grade III Grade IV (3) The posts in Grade I shall be Central Civil posts, C lass II Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) and those in Grades II, III and IV shall be Central Civil posts Group ‘C’ (Non-Gazetted) . (4) Members of the service shall, in the normal course be eligible for appointment to various Grades of the service to which th ey belong and not to the other service.” (underlining is ours) Subordinate services in the National Capital Territory of Delhi are, therefore, clearly Central Civil Services. The Affidavit of the Union also points out this feature by stating that, “ The posts in CCS Group C are in the subordinate services. The equivalent in the Union Territory of Delhi is the Delhi Administrative Subordin ate Services (DASS) and the Recruiting Agency in the place of Staf f Selection Commission is the Delhi Subordinate Service Selecti on Board (DSSSB). Members of the Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services are the Feeder Cadre for Central Civil Services Group B (DANICS). It is for these reasons that the policy (of pan Ind ia eligibility) consistently adopted .” 22 58. A combined reading of these provisions of the DASS Rules, 1967 and CCS Rules, 1965, therefore, more than adequately explai ns the nature of Subordinate Services in the NCT of Delhi. These clearly are General Central Services and perhaps, it is owing to this state of affairs that the Union of India in its Affidavit has stated that, “ Members of the Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services ar e the Feeder Cadre for Central Civil Services Group B (DANICS). It is for these reasons that the policy (of pan India eligibility) is consistently adopted .” 59. While examining the validity of reservation of seats in medical colleges for local candidates in Delhi, this Court in Dr. Ja gdish Saran and OthersVs . Union of India 23 had made certain observations with regard to the special status that the capital city enjoys, which today, has 22 Page 6, Para (b) of the Affidavit. 23 (1980) 2 SCC 768 567 come to be known as the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The observations of this Court in paragraphs 10 and 56 may be useful ly recapitulated and, therefore, is set out below: “10. The capital city is not just a part of India. It is miniaturised India, a fact often forgotten by the administration in the field of culture and education, especially vis-a-vis regional, minorities. It is magapolitan and people from all parts flock to this outsized city. But we cannot exaggerate this factor, for the presence of the farther regions like the South and the North-east, population-wise, is minimal and precarious. Shri Balakrishnan insisted tha t the University was sustained by Central Government finan ces, collected from the whole country, and the benefits must likewise belong to all qualified students from everywhere. These are valuable aspects to shape policy but the court must test constitutionality and no more. To that extent alone we will weigh these factors in moulding our verdict. xxx xxx xxx 56. We may wind-up by articulating the core thought that vitalises our approach. Anyone who lives inside India can nev er be considered an ‘outsider’ in Delhi. The people in the Sta tes are caught in a happy network of mutuality, woven into a lovely garment of humanity, whose warp and woof is India. This is the underlying fundamental of the preambular resolve registered in our National Parchment. So we insist that blind and bigoted local patriotism in xenophobic exclusivism is destructive of our Freedom and only if compelling considerations of gross injustice, desperate backwardness and glaring inequality desiderate such a purposeful course can protective discrimination gain entrance into the portals of college campuses. The Administration has a constitution al responsibility not to be a mere thermometer where mercury rises with populist pressure but to be a thermostat that transforms the mores of groups to stay in the conscience of the nation viz . the Constitution.” 60. The Affidavit of the Union does not touch upon the details of Subordinate Services in other Union Territories. Neither the authorities of the other Union Territories have laid before the Court a ny relevant BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [RANJAN GOGOI, J.] material in this regard. We, therefore, refrain from addressing the issue in question as far as other Union Territories are concerned and have confined our discussions and the consequential views only to the National Capital Territory of Delhi. 61. Accordingly, we answer the question referred in terms of the views expressed in para 34 of this opinion. We further hold that so far as the National Capital Territory of Delhi is concerned the pan India Reservation Rule in force is in accord with the constitutional scheme relating to services under the Union and the States/Union Territories. 62. In view of the conclusions reached as above, it will not b e necessary to remit Civil Appeal Nos. 1085 of 2013, 10081 of 2014, 8141 of 2014, 8802 of 2012, 1086 of 2013 and Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 2017 (pertaining to Delhi) for further consideration by the appropriate Bench. Acc ordingly, we dispose of the said appeals (pertaining to Delhi) in terms of the present order. So far as Civil Appeal Nos.9935-9937 of 2014 pertaining to the U.T. of Andaman and Nicobar Island are concerned the issue may be decided by the appropriate Bench in the light of the views ex pressed herein on adequate and sufficient materials being placed before the Bench by the contesting parties. R. BANUMATHI, J. Reference Order :- I have gone through the judgment proposed by His Lordship Justice Ranjan Gogoi. I agree with the following conclusions arrived at in paras (30) and (34) and the reasonings thereon. “A person notified as a Scheduled Caste in State ‘A’ ca nnot claim the same status in another State on the basis that he is declared as a Scheduled Caste in State ‘A’......”. “....... It will, therefore, be in consonance with the constitutional scheme to understand the enabling provision under A rticle 16(4) to be available to provide reservation only to the classes or categories of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes 569 enumerated in the Presidential orders for a particular St ate/ Union Territory within the geographical area of tha t State/ Union Territory (Union Territory added by me ) and not beyond.” With due respect, I do not agree with the conclusion arrived at in para (61) and the reasonings thereon. “......So far as the National Capital Territory of D elhi is concerned the pan-India Reservation Rule in force is in accor d with the constitutional scheme relating to services under the Union and the States/Union Territories.” For agreeing with the conclusion arrived at in paras (30) and (34) and for differing from the conclusions in para (61) and the reasonings thereon, I have given my own reasonings. 2. The extent and nature of interplay and interaction under Articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution of India was referred to the Constitution Bench in State of Uttaranchal v. Sandeep Kumar Singh and Ors., (2010) 12 SCC 794, with the following reference:- “13. A very important question of law as to interpretation of Articles 16(4), 341 and 342 arises for consideration in this appeal. Whether the Presidential Order issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) of the Constitution has any bearing on the State’s action in making provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any Backward Class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State? The extent and nature of interplay and interaction among Articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution is required to be resolved.” 3. Territory of India:- Article 1(1) of the Constitution of India declares that India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States. As amended by the Constitution Seventh (Amendment) Act, 1956. Article 1 of the Constitution reads as under:- 1. Name and territory of the Union .- (1) India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States. (2) The States and the territories thereof shall be as specified in the First Schedule. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] (3) The territory of India shall comprise— ( a) the territories of the States; ( b) the Union Territories specified in the First Schedule; and ( c) such other territories as may be acquired. 4. Under the Constitution of India, as initially enacted, the States were divided into Part A States, Part B States, Part C States and the territories in Part D. Substantial changes were made by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956 which incorporated th e recommendations of the States Reorganisation Commission and was to have effect in concert with the States Reorganisation A ct, 1956. The four categories of States that existed were reduced to two categories. The first of these categories - Part A and Part B State s comprised one class, called “States”. The second category comprised the areas which had earlier been included in Part C and Part D States; these areas were called “Union Territories”. Some additions and deletions were made to the existing lists. Now as per Schedule I, there are twenty-nine States and Seven Union Territories. 5. The expression “State” is not defined in the Constitution. It is defined in the General Clauses Act, 1897 which is made applicab le to the interpretation of the Constitution by Article 367. As on the date of the commencement of the Constitution, clause (58) in Section 3 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 defined “State” in the following words:- “3. (58) ‘State’ , — shall mean a Part A State, a Part B State or a Part C State.” The said definition was amended by the Adaptation of Laws Order No. 1 of 1956 issued by the President in exercise of the power conferred upon him by Article 372-A of the Constitution introd uced by the Constitution Seventh (Amendment) Act, 1956. The amended definition ‘State’ reads thus:- “3. (58) ‘State’, — ( a) as respects any period before the commencement of the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, shall mean a Part A State, a Part B State or a Part C State; and 571 ( b) as respects any period after such commencement, shall mean a State specified in the First Schedule to the Constitution and shall include a Union Territory.” 6. Clause (30) in Article 366 defines the “Union Territory” in the following words:- “366. (30) ‘Union Territory’ means any Union Territory specified in the First Schedule and includes any other territory comprised with the territory of India but not specified in that Schedule.” 7. Clause (24) of Article 366 defines “ Scheduled Castes ” and clause (25) of Article 366 defines “ Scheduled Tribes ”. The latter means “such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups w ithin such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be ‘Scheduled Tribes’ for the purposes of this Constitu tion ”. Article 341(1) of the Constitution empowers the President, in consultation with the Governor of the State concerned, to specify Scheduled Cas tes by public notification. Equally, Article 342(1) of the Constitution empowers the President “ with respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, b y public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which sh all for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be ‘Scheduled Trib es’ in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be ”. Article 342(2) of the Constitution empowers “ Parliament, by law, to include in or exclude from the list of ‘Scheduled Tribes’ s pecified in a notification issued under clause (1), any tribe or trib al community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said claus e shall not be varied by any subsequent notification .” Until the Presidential Notification is modified by appropriate amendment by Parli ament in exercise of the power under Article 341(2) of the Constit ution, the Presidential Notification issued under Article 341(1) is final and conclusive and any caste or group cannot be added to it or subtracted by any action either by the State Government or by a Court on adducing of evidence. In other words, it is the constitutional mandate that the tr ibes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities specified by the President, after consultation with the Gove rnor in the BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] public notification, will be ‘ Scheduled Tribes ’ subject to the law made by Parliament alone, which may, by law, include in or exclude from the list of ‘ Scheduled Tribes ’ specified by the President. Thereafter, it cannot be varied except by law made by the Parliament. 8. The President of India alone is competent or authorized to issue an appropriate Notification in terms of Article 341(1) and Article 342(1). Cumulative reading of Articles 338, 341 and 342 indicate that:- a) Only the President could notify castes/tribes as Schedul ed Castes/Tribes and also indicate conditions attaching to such declaration. A public Notification by the President specifying the particular castes or tribes as SC/ST shall be fina l for the purpose of Constitution and shall be exhaustive. b) Once a notification is issued under clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, the Parliament can by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, specified in the notification, any caste or tribe but save for that limited purpose the notification issued under clause (1), shall not be varied by any subsequent notification 1. 9. It is stated that before notification was issued under Artic le 341(1) and Article 342(1) notifying certain caste/race o r group as Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, an elaborate enquiry was made and also after such enquiry, the Presidential Order was issued. While doing so, Presidential Order not only specified parts or groups of caste, races or tribes but also made the said specification by reference to different areas in the State. By perusal of the Presidential Order, it is clear that some caste/race is actually confined with reference to a particular area; for instance, confined to a particular taluk in a district. The reason for such specification by reference to different areas in t he State being educational, social backwardness, races or tribes cannot be the same throughout the State. The consideration for specifying a particular caste or tribe or class for inclusion in the list of Schedu led Castes and Scheduled Tribes or Backward Classes in a given State would de pend on the nature and extent of the disadvantages and social h ardships suffered in that State. These may be absent in another Sta te to which these persons belonging to other States may migrate. 1 Ref. Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Union of India (UOI) and Anr. (1994) 5 SCC 244. 573 10. Whenever States’ reorganization took place in the past, Parliament exercised its powers under Articles 341(2) and 342(2) and provided for specific Castes/Tribes that had to be Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in relation to the reorganized States/Union Territories. The Constitution Scheduled Caste Orders and the Constitution Scheduled Castes (Union Territories) Order, also clarify that Parliament’s intention was to extend benefits of reservation in relation to the S tates/Union Territories in terms of the castes, races or tribes mentio ned as per the Presidential Orders themselves. 11. Presidential Order which provided for castes/races, t ribes recognized as ‘ Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe’ and their interpretation cannot be challenged or agitated in a court of law. The question whether Dohar caste is a sub-caste of Chamar caste which is recognized as a Scheduled Caste came up for consideration in Bhaiya Lal v. Harikishan Singh , AIR 1965 SC 1557, wherein this Court held that the court cannot enquire into whether Dohar caste is a sub-caste of Chamar caste and whether the same must be deemed to have been included in the Presidential Order. In Bhaiya Lal’s case , this Court held “...that before a notification is issued under Article 341(1), an elaborate enquiry is made and it is as a result of this enquir y that social justice is sought to be done to the castes, races or tribes as may appear to be necessary, and in doing justice... ” and while doing so, the notification not only to specify parts or groups of castes, races or tribes but to make specification by reference to diff erent areas in the State. In Bhaiya Lal’s case, the Supreme Court held that only the Parliament is empowered to amend the Notification under Articles 341(2) and 342(2) of the Constitution. 12. Presidential Notification (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950:- The List of Scheduled Castes is contained in the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950. The Presidential Notifications of 1950 and 1951 (as amended) in relation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of various States, very importantly provided that:- “2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes sp ecified in [Parts I to XXV] of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] the States to which those Parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so far as regards members thereof resident in the localities specified in relation to them respectively in those Parts of that Schedule .” The Presidential Notification of 1950 was amended b y the Constitution (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order), Amendment Act, 1956, (Act No.63 of 1956). Another amending Act was enacted by Parliament in 1976. Further, amendments had taken place as and when Parliament reorganized States like Bombay, Andhra Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand through separate Acts. All these were Parliamentary enactments. Presidentia l Notification pertaining to Union Territories, Scheduled Castes (Union Ter ritories) Order, 1951 specifies Scheduled Castes resident in the Union Territories of Delhi, Chandigarh and Daman and Diu. When new Un ion Territories were formed such as Pondicherry, Sikkim, Goa, Daman and Diu, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes Orders were made in relation to those new Union Territories. 13. The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 2:- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 342 of the Constitution of India the President has, after consult ation with the Governors of the States concerned, made the Constitution (Schedule d Tribes) Order, 1950, specifying the tribes or communities which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in the States mentioned there in. This Order has been amended by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No.108 of 1976), the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 1991 (16 of 1991), the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Act, 1991 (39 of 1991), the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Trib es Orders (Amendment) Act, 2002 (32 of 2002), the Scheduled C astes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 2002 (10 of 2003), the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2003 (47 of 2003), the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act 2006 (48 of 2006), the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2008 (14 of 2008) and the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Union Territories Order (Amendment) Act, 2008 (2 of 2009). As it st ands amended, it specifies the Scheduled Tribes resident in the States of Andhra 2 Ref. Election Manual (1984), p.44 quoted in Comment ary on the Constitution of India 8 th Ed. by Durga Das Basu. 575 Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, West Bengal. 14. Article 16(4) is only an enabling provision to provide reservation to backward classes. Clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution cannot be made applicable for the purpose of grant of benefit of reservation for Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in a State or Union Territ ory, who have migrated to another State or Union Territory and they are not members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State to which they have migrated. The Presidential Orders made under Article 341 and Article 342 have an overriding status. The presence of Articles 338, 338A, 341, 342 of the Constitution clearly shows that it precludes any tinkering or deviation from the list of castes or tribes notified in the Presidential Order which are reserved for that State o r that Union territory. 15. India is huge. There is Unity in Diversity . Diversity in terms of language, culture, demography, geographical area, development of regions, opportunities available to individuals for education and to make social and economical advancement etc. Some States are well-developed; some other States are developing; few other States are under-developed. All the affirmative action of the States is to provide equality of opportunity to the socially and economically disadvantaged group. Under Art icle 15(4) of the Constitution, State is empowered to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward class of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 of the Constitution of India lays down that there shall be e quality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Article 16(4) of the Constitution empowers the State to make provisions to provide reserva tion to the backward classes in employment or appointment to any posts and thereby to create equally opportunities for their socio-economic empowerment and their emancipation. Article 16(4) speaks of one type of reservation namely reservation of appointments/posts. 16. Article 16(4) of the Constitution is an enabling provision directed towards achieving equality of opportunity in services under the State. Observing that Article 14 of the Constitution is the genus while BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] Article 16 is the species, in E. P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr. , (1974) 4 SCC 3, it was held that:- “85 . .........Article 16 embodies the fundamental guarantee that there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in m atters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Though enacted as a distinct and independent fundamental right because of its great importance as a principle e nsuring equality of opportunity in public employment which is so vital to the building up of the new classless egalitarian society envisaged in the Constitution, Article 16 is only an instance of the application of the concept of equality enshrined in Article 14. In other words, Article 14 is the genus while Article 16 is a species. Article 16 gives effect to the doctrine of equality in all matters relating to public employment. The basic principle which, therefore, informs both Articles 14 and 16 is equality and inhibition against discrimination. Now, what is the content and reach of this grea t equalising principle? It is a founding faith, to use the wor ds of Bose. J., “a way of life”, and it must not be subjected to a narrow pedantic or lexicographic approach. We cannot countenance any attempt to truncate its all-embracing scope and meaning, for to do so would be to violate its activist magnitude. Equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and dimensions and it cann ot be “cribbed, cabined and confined” within traditional and doctrinaire limits ........” [ Underlining added ] 17. The Constitution Bench of nine Judges in Indra Sawhney and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. , (1992) Supp 3 SCC 217, observed that Article 16(4) of the Constitution is aimed at ‘ protective equality ’ and it was held as under:- “563 . Thus, Article 16(1) and (4) operate in the same field. Both are directed towards achieving equality of opportunity in services under the State. One is broader in sweep and expansive in reach. Other is limited in approach and narrow in applicability. Former applies to ‘all’ citizens whereas latter is available to ‘any’ in Article 16(4) read together indicate that they are part of same scheme. The one is substantive equality and other is protective equa lity. Article 16(1) is fundamental right of a citizen whereas Articl e 16(4) is an obligation of the State. The former is enforceable in a 577 Court of law, whereas the latter is ‘not constitutional compulsion’ but an enabling provision. Whether Article 16(4) is in substance, ‘an exception’, ‘a proviso’, or an ‘emphatic way of putti ng the extent to which equality of opportunity could be carried’, or ‘presumed to exhaust all exceptions in favour of backward class’, or ‘expressly designed as benign discrimination devoted to lifting to backward classes’, but if Article 16(1) is the positive aspect of equality of opportunity’, Article 16(4) is a complete Code f or reservation for backward class of citizens as it not only provides for exercise of power but also lays down the circumstances, in which the power can be exercised, and the purpose and extent or its exercise. One is mandatory and operates automatically whereas the other comes into play on identification of backward class of citizens and their inadequate representation .” [ Underlining added ] 18. Article 16(4) of the Constitution is not an exception; but a facet of Article 14 and Article 16(1) of the Constitution; it enables the State to effectuate equality of opportunity to any backward cl ass. As held in Chattar Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (1996) 11 SCC 742 in paras (17) and (18), that “.... It gives power to the state to effectuate the opportunity of equality to any bac kward class of citizens. ……..The object of reservation for the Sc heduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes is to bring them into the mainstream of national life, while the objective in respect of the backwar d classes is to remove their social and educational handicaps. Therefore, they ar e always treated dissimilar and they do not form an integrate d class with Dalits and Tribes for the purpose of Article 16(4) or 15 (4)...”. 19. In State of Kerala and Anr. v. N.M. Thomas and Ors. (1976) 2 SCC 310 in para (178), it was held that “... differences and disparities exist among men and things and they cannot be tre ated alike by the application of the same laws but the law has to c ome in terms with life and must be able to recognize the genuine di fferences and disparities that exist in human nature. Legislature has also to enact legislation to meet specific ends by making a reas onable and rational classification..”. 20. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao v. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College and Ors. , (1990) 3 SCC 130 BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] had the occasion to consider the question as to whether a memb er of Gouda community which is recognised as “ Scheduled Tribe ” in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 would be entitled to admission in a medical institution situated in the State of Mahara shtra. Based on the Government of India circular dated 22.02.1985, the appellant w as denied admission to the Medical College on the ground that Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao was not a ‘Scheduled Tribe’ in the migrated Sta te i.e. State of Maharashtra. 21. After referring to various provisions of Constitution of India, background in which the Presidential Order was issued and ea rlier judgments, in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao’s case , it was held as under:- “9. It appears that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in some States had to suffer the social disadvantages and did not have the facilities for development and growth. It is, therefor e, necessary in order to make them equal in those areas where they have so suffered and are in the state of underdevelopment t o have reservations or protection in their favour so that they c an compete on equal terms with the more advantageous or developed sections of the community. Extreme social and econo mic backwardness arising out of traditional practices of untouchability is normally considered as criterion for including a community in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The social conditions of a caste, however, varies from State to Stat e and it will not be proper to generalise any caste or any tri be as a Scheduled Tribe or Scheduled Caste for the whole country. This, however, is a different problem whether a member or the Scheduled Caste in one part of the country who migrates to another State or any other Union territory should continue to be treated a s a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in which he has migrated. That question has to be judged taking into consideration the interest and well-being of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the country as a whole.” 22. Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao case was followed by another Constitution Bench of this Court in Action Committee on issue of caste certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in th e State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. (1994) 5 SCC 244. In Action Committee’s case, it was held as under:- 579 “3. On a plain reading of clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 it is manifest that the power of the President is limited to speci fying the castes or tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or a Union Territory, as the case may be. Once a notification is issued under clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, Parliament can by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, specified in the notification, any caste or tribe but save for that limited purpose the notification issued under clause (1), shall not be varied by any subsequent notification. What is important to notice is that the castes or tribes have to be specified in relation to a given State or Union Territory. That means a given caste or tribe can be a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to the State or Union Territory for which it is specified. These are the rel evant provisions with which we shall be concerned while dealing with the grievance made in this petition. .... 16. We may add that considerations for specifying a particula r caste or tribe or class for inclusion in the list of Scheduled Castes/ Schedule Tribes or backward classes in a given State would depend on the nature and extent of disadvantages and social hardships suffered by that caste, tribe or class in that State whi ch may be totally non est in another State to which persons belonging thereto may migrate. Coincidentally it may be that a caste or tribe bearing the same nomenclature is specified in two States bu t the considerations on the basis of which they have been specifie d may be totally different. So also the degree of disadvanta ges of various elements which constitute the input for specification may also be totally different. Therefore, merely because a given caste is specified in State A as a Scheduled Caste does not necessarily mean that if there be another caste bearing the same nomenclature in another State the person belonging to the former would be entitled to the rights, privileges and benefits admissible to a member of the Scheduled Caste of the latter State “for the purpo ses of this Constitution”. This is an aspect which has to be kept in mind and which was very much in the minds of the Constitution-makers BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] as is evident from the choice of language of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution....” Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao’s case and Action Committee’s case were followed in Subhash Chandra and Anr. v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Ors. , (2009) 15 SCC 458. In Subhash Chandra case, the Supreme Court reiterated that “ If a caste or tribe is notified in terms of the Scheduled Caste s Order or the Scheduled Tribes Order, the same must be done in terms of clause (1) of Article 341 as also that of Article 342 of the Cons titution of India, as the case may be. No deviation from the pr ocedure laid down therein is permissible in law. If any amendmen t/alteration thereto is required to be made, recourse to the procedure lai d down under clause (2) thereof must be resorted to.” 23. In Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao’s case , it was held that a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe of any State which depends on the nature and extent of disadvantages and social hardships suffered by the caste, tribe or class in that State or area may be non-existent in another State. The inclusion of the castes, races or tribes is mainly based on the degree of disadvantages or hardships faced by the castes, races or tribes in that State or in some cases or in part area of the State. For instance, in the Presidential Order relating to the State of Tamil Nadu, the caste Kanikaran, Kanikkar (in Kanyakumari District and Shenkottah and Ambasaundram taluks of Tirunelveli district) are notified as Scheduled Castes. This shows that the President can specify caste s, races or tribes or parts thereof in relation not only to the entire State but in relation to the parts of the State. The President has been authorised to limit the notification to parts of the State or groups within castes, races or tribes. In Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao case , the Constitution Bench therefore held that the expression “in relation to that State ” must be read meaningfully; otherwise the expression “in relation to that State” would come nugatory. 24. The Presidential Order issued under Article 341 of the Constitution in regard to Scheduled Castes and Article 342 of the Constitution in regard to Scheduled Tribes cannot be varied by anyone or by the Court. Only the Parliament by law include or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued under Article 341(1) and Article 342(1) of the C onstitution 581 respectively any caste, race or tribe or parts or group within a ny caste, race or tribe. The Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes thus specified in relation to one State or Union Territory does not carry their status in another State or Union Territory. When the Schedul ed Castes or Scheduled Tribes are specified for each State and in some cases, specific areas of the State or Union Territory, 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 Constitu tion and the Presidential Orders issued thereon. If that is permitted, it would amount to addition or alteration of the Presidential Order which is viola tive of the Constitutional Scheme. 25. State of Maharashtra v. Milind and Ors. (2001) 1 SCC 4, dealt with a question as to whether the notified Scheduled Tribe be ing Halba or Halbi as contained in item 19 of the Presidential Order would include “Halba-Koshti”. This Court held that addition of “Halba-Koshti” in the Presidential Order would amount to amendment thereto which is impermissible in law. In Milind’s case , it was held as under:- “33. .....The jurisdiction of the High Court would be much more restricted while dealing with the question whether a parti cular caste or tribe would come within the purview of the notifie d Presidential Order, considering the language of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution. These being the parameters and in t he case in hand, the Committee conducting the inquiry as well as the Appellate Authority, having examined all relevant materials and having recorded a finding that Respondent 1 belonged to “Koshti” caste and has no identity with “Halba/Halbi” which is the Scheduled Tribe under Entry 19 of the Presidential Order, relating to the State of Maharashtra, the High Court exceeded its supervisory jurisdiction by making a roving and in-depth examination of the materials afresh and in coming to the conclusion that “Koshtis” could be treated as “Halbas”. In this view the High Court could not upset the finding of fact in exercise of its writ juri sdiction. Hence, we have to essentially answer Question 2 also i n the negative. Hence it is answered accordingly.” 26. When the Parliament restricts the benefit of reserva tion by inclusion of a caste as a Scheduled Caste to a State or part of St ate i.e. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] certain specified districts in a State, the Court cannot express any opinion as to its correctness. Hence, as regards the inc lusion of caste “Mochi” in the list of Scheduled Castes within a particular a rea as per Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, it was held that it was not for the Court to render any opinion in regard to the correctness of the same. [v ide Shree Surat Valsad Jilla K.M.G. Parishad v. Union of India and Ors. (2007) 5 SCC 360]. 27. The executive instructions/circulars issued by the Government of India also reiterate to well-settled position. The ci rcular No. BC- 16014/1/82-SC & BCD-I dated 06.08.1984 of the Ministry of Home Affairs addressed to all State Governments and UT Administration states that SC and ST on migration from the State of his origin t o another State will not lose his status as SC/ST; but will b e entitled to the concession/benefits admissible to the SC/ST from the State of his origin and not from the State where he has migrated. The relevant portion of the said circular reads as under:- No. BC-16014/1/82-SC & BCD-I Government of India/Bharat Sarkar Ministry of Home Affairs/GrihMantralaya New Delhi, the 6 th August, 1984 To, The Chief Secretaries of All State Governments and U.T. Administrations. Subject: - Verification of claim of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and migrants from other States/Union Territories-Form of certificate - Amendment to. Sir, …….. 2. The instructions issued in this Ministry’s letter of even number dated the 18.11.1982 will continue. It is, however, clarified that the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe person on migration from the State of his origin to another State will not lose his status as Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes but he will be entitled t o the concessions/benefits admissible to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled 583 Tribes from the State of his origin and not from the State w here he has migrated…… ( Underlining added ) Yours faithfully Sd/- Joint Secretary to Govt. of India 28. The same thing was reiterated in the circular dated 22.02.1985 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs which has also clarif ied that a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe person who has migrated from the State of origin to some other State for the purpose of seeking education, employment, etc. will be deemed to be a Scheduled Caste/Tribe of the State of his origin and will be entitled to derive benefits from the State of origin and not from the State to which he has migrated. 29. My Conclusion for agreeing with the view taken in paras (30) and (32):- It is now settled law that a person belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe in State ‘A ’ cannot claim the same status in another State ‘B’ on the ground that he is declared as a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe in State ‘A’. 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 of India are to be meaningfully interpreted. A given caste or tribe can be a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to that State or Union Territory for which it is specified. Thus, the person notified as a Scheduled Caste in State ‘A’ cannot claim the same status in another State on the basis that he was declared Scheduled Caste in State ‘A ’. Article 16(4) has to yield to the Constitutional mandate of Articles 341 and 342. Union Territories : 30. Part VIII of the Constitution of India deals wi th Union Territories. Article 239 provides that the Union Terri tory shall be administered by the President acting through an Administrato r to be appointed by him. Article 239 reads as follows:- “239 . Administration of Union Territories (1) Save as otherwise provided by Parliament by law, every Union Territory shall be administered by the President acting , to such extent as he thinks fit, through an administrator to be appointed by him with such designation as he may specify. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Part VI, the President may appoint the Governor of a State as the administrator of a n adjoining Union Territory, and where a Governor is so appointed, he shall exercise his functions as such administrator independently of his Council of Ministers.” 31. Article 239A was inserted by the Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) Act, 1962. Article 239A of the Constitution of India empowers the Parliament to create by law legislatures and C ouncil of Ministers in the then Union Territories of Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Goa, Daman & Diu and Pondicherry. Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram were added later. With Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, Goa and Mizoram all becoming full-fledged States, the only Union Territory left under Article 239A is Pondicherry. Now, Union Territory of Pondicherry (Puducherry) also has a legislature and Council of Ministers. 32. Article 341 empowers the President “with respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a State, after consultat ion with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the castes , races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of this Constitution, be deemed to be Scheduled Ca ste in relation to that State or Union Territory as the case may be.” Eq ually Article 342(1) empowers the President “with respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a State, after consultati on with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or triba l communities which shall for the purposes of the Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be”. Articles 341(2) and 342(2) of the Constitution empower the Parliament alone by law to include or exclude from the list of Scheduled Cast es/ Scheduled Tribes specified by notification issued under Articles 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution of India. Until the Presidential Notification is modified by appropriate amendment by Parliament in exercise of the power under Articles 341(2) or 342(2) of the Constitution, the Presidential Notification issued under Articles 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution is final and conclusive. No caste or group can be added to it or subtracted by any action either by the State Government or by a Court on adducing of evidence. Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution do not make any distinction between a ‘State’ or ‘Union Territory’. 585 33. Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Union Territories) Order, 1951:- In exercise of powers under Clause (1) of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, the Presidential Notifications we re issued specifying Scheduled Castes in relation to various Union Territories. List of Scheduled Castes are declared in relation to each Union Te rritory separately. Presidential Notification pertaining to Union Territories, Scheduled Castes (Union Territories) Order, 1951 specifies Scheduled Castes resident in the Union Territories of Delhi, Chandigarh and Daman and Diu. The Presidential Order provided that:- “Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes, specified in *[Parts I to III] of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the *[Union territories] to which those parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so far as regards members thereof res ident in the localities specified in relation to them respectively in those Parts of that Schedule .” As and when there is reorganisation of the Union Territories, in exercise of the powers conferred under Article 341(1) of the Constitution, the President has made various orders. 34. The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Union Territories) Order, 1951 3 :- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 342 of the Constitution of India, as amended by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, the President made the C onstitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951, specifying the tribes or communities which shall be deemed to be ‘Scheduled Tribes’ in Part C State. This Order was adapted for the Union Territories by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Lists (Modification) Order, 1956. 35. When new territories were formed, such as Pondiche rry (Puducherry), or Sikkim, the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes Orders were made in relation to the new territories. In exercis e of the powers under Articles 341(1) and 342(1), the President has made the orde rs - The Constitution (Dadra and Nagar Haveli) Scheduled Castes Or der, 1962; The Constitution (Dadra and Nagar Haveli) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1962; The Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order , 1964; The Constitution (Goa, Daman and Diu) Scheduled Caste Order, 3 Ref. Ibid., p.53, quoted in Article 342 of commenta ry on the Constitution of India 8th Ed. by Durga Das Basu. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] 1968; The Constitution (Goa, Daman and Diu) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1968; In the case of Goa, the Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act, 1987 (Act No.18 of 1987), by Section 19 amended the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders. 36. Union Territories do not become merged with the Central Government:- The Union Territories are centrally administered by the President acting through an administrator. As held by this Court in New Delhi Municipal Council v. State of Punjab & Ors . (1997) 7 SCC 339, the President, who is the executive head of a Union Territory while administering the Union Territory, does not function as the head of the Central Government, but as the head of the Union Territory under powers specially vested in him under Article 239 of the Const itution thereby occupying a position analogous to that of a Governor in a State. Though the Union Territories are centrally administer ed under the provisions of Article 239, they do not become merged with the Central Government as has been held by this Court in Satya Dev Bushahri v. Padam Dev and Ors. AIR 1954 SC 587. They are centrally administered; but they retain their independent identity [ Chandigarh Administration and Anr. v. Surinder Kumar and Ors. (2004) 1 SCC 530]. The Union Territory does not entirely lose its existence as an entity though large control is exercised by the Union of India. [ Government of NCT Delhi v. All India Central Civil Accounts, Jao’s Association and Ors. (2002) 1 SCC 344] 37. View taken in Pushpa and Chandigarh Administration – not correct view:- Reliance was placed upon Pushpa’s case to contend that Article 16(4) is not controlled by the Presidential Order issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) to the Officers appointed to the post in the Union Territories need not be confined to only such Schedule Castes/ Schedule Tribes of the particular Union Territory. In Pushpa’s case , the Supreme Court was confined with the question as to whether, selection and appointment already made to migrants’ Schedule Caste candidates of other States against the quota reserved for the Sc hedule Caste candidates in the Union Territory of Pondicherry was legal and valid. In S. Pushpa and Ors. v. Shivachanmugavelu and Ors. (2005) 3 SCC 1, Pondicherry Government appointed Selection Grade Teachers in 1995 under the Scheduled Castes quota not only from the Scheduled Castes candidates of Pondicherry but also such candidates of Scheduled Castes 587 from other States. In Pushpa’s case , this Court upheld the policy of the Pondicherry Government extending the benefit of reservation of SC/ST seats even to those candidates who came from other States. The Pondicherry Government proceeded on the basis that since C entral Government jobs were open to all SC/ST candidates irrespective of origin of their States, the same may apply to jobs with a Union Te rritory as well. In Pushpa’s case , this Court held that in the matter of providing reservation, it was open to the Pondicherry Government to extend the benefit of reservation to migrant Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates and that the same will not be an infraction of cl ause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. 38. In Pushpa’s case , the principle that “ when members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes migrate to another State, they do not carry with them the special privileges and advantages ”, was held not applicable in case of Union Territories. In para (21) of Pushpa’s case , it was held as under:- “21. ....Article 16(4) is not controlled by a Presidential Order issued under Article 341(1) or Article 342(1) of the Constitution in the sense that reservation in the matter of appointment on posts may be made in a State or Union Territory only for such Schedul ed Castes and Scheduled Tribes which are mentioned in the Schedule appended to the Presidential Order for that particular Stat e or Union Territory . This article does not say that only such Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes which are mentioned in the Presidential Order issued for a particular State alone w ould be recognised as backward classes of citizens and none else. If a State or Union Territory makes a provision whereunder the benefit of reservation is extended only to such Scheduled Caste s or Scheduled Tribes which are recognised as such in relation to that State or Union Territory then such a provision would be perfectly valid. However, there would be no infraction of clause (4) of Article 16 if a Union Territory by virtue of its peculiar position being governed by the President as laid down in Article 239 extends the benefit of reservation even to such migrant Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes who are not mentioned in the Schedule to the Presidential Order issued for such Union Territory. The UT o f Pondicherry having adopted a policy of the Central Government BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] whereunder all Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, irrespective of their State are eligible for posts which are reserved for SC/ST candidates, no legal infirmity can be ascribed to such a policy and the same cannot be held to be contrary to any provision of law .” (Underlining added ) In my considered view, the above observation in Pushpa’s case is not a correct view. The judgment in Pushpa’s case is contrary to the views taken in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao’s case. The judgment in Pushpa’s case is contrary to the views taken in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao’s case. Facts of Pushpa’s case disclose that the Government of Pondicherry had throughout proceeded on the basis that being a Union Territory all orders regarding reservation for SC/ST in respect of post/ services under the Central Government were applicable to post/services as under the Pondicherry administration. The decision in Pushpa’s case therefore cannot be taken to be an authoritative pronouncement. Clause (2) of Article 341 of the Constitution empowers Parliament alone by law to include or exclude from the lists of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) of Article 341. No executive action or order or modification or variance of the same is possible and any such variance would be against the constitutional scheme. 39. In Pushpa’s case , the posts advertised were of Selection Grade Teachers under the Pondicherry Services and not for Centr al Government jobs. It may be that Pondicherry is a Union Territory; but the posts/services exclusively coming under Pondicherry administration is meant only for the Scheduled Casts/Scheduled Tribes as notified under the Presidential Order for Pondicherry. In fact, Pondicherry (Union Territory) itself by referring to Subhash Chandra’s case has taken the decision that reservation benefits to posts/services arising under the Union Territory of Pondicherry will be confined only to the Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes notified by virtue of Presidential Order. The said Government Order of the Pondicherry Government was upheld by this Court in Puducherry Scheduled Caste People Welfare Association v. Chief Secretary to Government, Union Territory of Pondicherry and Ors. (2014) 9 SCC 236, wherein this Court held as under:- “13. It is important to bear in mind that it is by virtue of the notification of President under Article 341(1) that the Scheduled Castes come into being. The members of the Scheduled Caste s 589 are drawn from castes, races or tribes, they attain a new status by virtue of Presidential Order. Clause (2) of Article 341 empowers Parliament alone by law to include or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) by the President. By no executive power, amendm ent, modification, alteration or variance in the Presidential Order is permissible. It is not open to the executive to do anything directly or indirectly which may lead to any change in the Presidenti al Order. Once Presidential Order has been issued under Articl e 341(1) or Article 342(1), any amendment in the Presidential Order can only be made by Parliament by law as provided in Artic le 341(2) or Article 342(2), as the case may be, and in no other manner. The interpretation of “resident” in the Presidential Order as “of origin” amounts to altering the Presidential Order.” 40. The principle in Pushpa’s case was not accepted in Subhash Chandra’s case . It was held that although Union Territory is administered by the Union Government, socio-political aspect of the Union Territory cannot be mixed up with administrative aspect. In Subhash Chandra’s case, it was held that if the principle applied in Pushpa ’s case is to be given a logical extension, it will lead to an absurdity, that the Scheduled Castes Order in a State/Union Territory brought unde r the control of the President under Article 341 of the Constitution could be altered by virtue of a notification issued in pursuance of Article 16(4) of the Constitution, which is not in consonance with the Constitutiona l Scheme. 41. Let us refer to the facts of Chandigarh Administration and Another v. Surinder Kumar and Others (2004) 1 SCC 530. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India issued various circulars pertaining to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The c ircular dated 22.02.1985 regarding “ Issue of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe certificate to migrants from other States/Union Terr itories ”, issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs clarified that a Scheduled Caste/Tribe person who has migrated from the State of origin to some o ther State for the purpose of seeking education, employment, etc. will be deemed to be a Scheduled Caste/Tribe of the State of his origin a nd will be entitled to derive benefits from the State of origin and not from the State BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] to which he has migrated. Based on the aforesaid ci rcular of the Government of India, the Home Secretary, Chandigarh Administration vide his letter dated 28.07.1986 sought clarification from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, as to whether, these instructions are applicable in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. Chandigarh Administration received the reply dated 26.08.1986 from Ministry of Welfare sta ting that there is no discrimination in the employment under the Cent ral Government between the Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribes of one State or another and Union Territories and that the same may be followed by the Chandigarh Administration. The letter dated 26.08.1986 stated that Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes of any other State/Union Territory would be entitled to the benefits and facilities provided in the services under the Union Territory of Chandigarh. Further the said circular leaves it to the Chandigarh Administration to seek further clarifica tion. The above letter of Government of India is in clear violation of Constitutional scheme. 42. Pursuant to the said letter, Chandigarh Administration sought clarification from the Department of Personnel and Training. However, they have not received any response. The clarification w as issued by the Home Secretary, Chandigarh Administration vide l etter dated 07.09.1999. The said letter had given a clarification b ased on the Government of India circular dated 02.02.1985 stating that a Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe of any other State or Union Territory would not be entitled to the benefits of reservation in the services in the Chandigarh Administration and that the benefit of reservation to persons belonging to reserved categories in other States in the Chandigarh Administration is to be discontinued with effect from 07.09.1999. In Chandigarh Administration case , the Supreme Court took the view that the stand taken by Chandigarh Administration discontinuing the be nefits of reservation with effect from 07.09.1999 was untenable. With due respect, I am not in agreement with the view taken in Chandigarh Administration case . The letter dated 26.08.1986 sent by the Ministry of Welfare/Kalyan Mantralaya is contrary to the letter dated 22.02.1985 sent by the Ministry of Home Affairs and also against the Constitutional scheme. 591 43. It was held in Subhash Chandra that Chandigarh Administration and Pushpa proceeded on the basis that Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee would have no application in relation to Union Territories. Observing that both Articles 341 and 342 not only refer to the State but also to the Union Territory. In para (64) of Subhash Chandra’s case, it was held as under:- “64. Although Union Territories are administered by the Central Government, yet it is difficult to conceive that the socio-political aspect can be mixed up with the administrative aspect. Ar ticle 341 leads to grant of constitutional rights upon a person whose affinity to a caste/tribe would attract the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order or the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order. Once a person comes within the purview of presidential promulgation, he would be entitled to constitutional and other statutor y or administrative benefits attached thereto. In our opinion, such socio- political rights created in our Constitution cannot be segregated keeping in view the administrative exigencies.” 44. As per the scheme of the Constitution under Articles 341, 342 and 239 of the Constitution, only those Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes as notified in the Presidential Notification for the respe ctive Union Territory can legitimately claim the benefit of reservation in that Union Territory. Even though the Union Territories are centrally administered, though the administrator/Lieutenant Governor so far as the administrative aspects of the Union Territories, each Union Territory has its own identity. Each of the Union Territories would be bound by their respective Presidential Order of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for giving benefit of reservation to Scheduled Castes/Schedule d Tribes in employment. Only those persons, who come within the purview of the Presidential Notification, would be entitled to constitutional and other statutory benefits of reservation in the respective Union Territory. If the benefit of reservation is to be extended to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes from all over the country then it would amount to inclus ion of caste, races or tribes to the Presidential Order perta ining to that Union Territory. As discussed earlier, such inclusion or e xclusion in the Presidential Order can be done only by the Parliament in the manner as indicated in Articles 341(2) and 342(2) of the Constitution of India. By no executive order, amendment, alteration or variance in the Presidential Order is permissible. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] Whether there can be PAN India reservation of SCs and ST s to services under various Union Territories of India 45. Under Central Civil Services (Classification, Control a nd Appeal) Rules, 1965 [CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965], there are four categories of services namely:- (i) Central Civil Services, Group A; (ii) Central Civil Services, Group B; (iii) Central Civil Services, Group C; and (iv) Central Civil Services, Group D Central Civil Services – Group A:- 46. As per the Schedule to Central Civil Services (CCA) Ru les, 1965, under Group ‘A’, there are forty five services inter alia like – (i) Archaeological Service (Serial No.1); (ii) Central Health Service (Serial No.5); (iii) Indian Defence Accounts Service (Serial No.11); (iv) Indian Foreign Service (Serial No.12); (v) Indian Meteorological Service (Serial No.13); (vi) Indian Postal Service (Serial No.14); (vii) Indian Posts and Telegraphs Traffic Service (Serial No.15); (viii) Indian Revenue Service (Serial No.16); (ix) Indian Salt Service (Serial No.17); (x) Directorate General of Mines Safety (Serial No.19); (xi) Indian Telecommunication Service (Serial No.22); (xii) Central Legal Service (Grades I,II, III and IV) (Serial No.25); (xiii) Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service, Grade I (DANICS) (Serial No.28); (xiv) Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Police Service, Grade II (DANIPS) (Serial No.29); (xv) Company Law Board Service (Serial No.38); (xvi) Labour Officers of the Central Pool (Serial No.39); and (xvii) Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Services (Serial No.44). 47. By reading of the categories of services, the said services of Group ‘A’ are concerned only with the services of the Union of I ndia and the appointment to Group ‘A’ services are made by the President. The Cadre Controlling Authority of Group ‘A’ services are the respective ministries of the Government of India. Recruitment to Group ‘A ’ services is made by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and the recruitment is on all-India basis. So far as the recruitment to Group ‘A’ services is concerned, Union of India in its counter affidavit has stated as under:- 593 “a. ……… Recruitment to Group A services is made by the UPSC. This recruitment is again on all India basis………… b. Whichever ministry seeks recruitment to the service i n this Group sends requisition to UPSC as per procedure prescribed and UPSC accordingly advertises for the post in Group A. Every citizen of India is eligible to apply as per the qualifications and requirements in the notification. c. DoPT is the nodal ministry for regulating the conditions of service of all Central Civil Services as per Allocation of Business Rules. As per the conditions of service, every employ ee is required to give an undertaking agreeing to the conditions of the all India transfer liability at the time of joining the service. d. Central Civil Services employees belonging to Group A serve the Union of India and that is the reason why these services are across the length and breadth of the country, wherever there is an office of the Central Government. e. Member of the Group A service are governed by Central Civil Services (Class, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 as well as Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1972 & Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and such other rules made by the central ministries.” 4 Central Civil Services – Group B:- 48. Under Rule 5, the Central Civil Services – Group ‘B’ a re specified in the Schedule and there are thirty-two such services mentioned. Some of the thirty-two services of Group ‘B’ and their appointing authorities are as under:- PART II - Central Civil Services, Group ‘B’ (Except for Civilians in Defence Services) Description of service (2) Appointing Authority (3) Description of service (2) Appointing Authority (3) Section Officer Grade of the Central Secretariat Service excluding Section Officers with Group 'A' status. ( Serial No.1 ) President Postal Superintendents' Service, Group 'B' (Serial No.7 ) Director- General Posts Postmasters' Service, Group 'B' ( Serial No.8 ) Director-General Posts Customs Preventive Service, Group 'B'- Chief Inspectors (Serial No.15 ) Collector of Customs BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] 4 Para No. 6(i) of the Counter Affidavit filed by the Union of India at Pg. No.3-4 Botanical Survey of India, Group 'B' ( Serial No.18 ) Chief Botanist, Botanical Survey of India Income Tax Service, Group 'B' (Serial No.17 ) Commissioner of Income Tax Geological Survey of India, Group 'B' ( Serial No.19 ) Director-General Geological, Survey of India Survey of India, Group 'B' ( Serial No.20 ) Surveyor General of India Zoological Survey of India, Group 'B' ( Serial No.21 ) Zoological Survey of India Central Electrical Engineering Service Group 'B' (Serial No.22 ) Director General (Works), Central Public Works Department Central Engineering Service, Group 'B': ( Serial No.24 ) (i) Posts in the Ministry of Irrigation and Power. (ii) Posts in the Central Water and Power Commission (iii) Posts in the Chambal Control Board (iv) Posts in the Farakka Barrage Control Board (v) Posts in the Ganga Discharge Circle Joint Secretary, Chairman, Central Water and Power Commission Joint Secretary, Ministry of Irrigation and Power Commissioner (Ganga Basin), Ministry of Irrigation and Power Commissioner (Ganga Basin), Ministry of Irrigation and Power Indian Salt Service, Group 'B' ( Serial No.26 ) Joint Secretary, Ministry of Production Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service, Grade II. (DANICS) (Serial No.28) Joint Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Police Service, Grade II. (DANIPS) (Serial No.29) Joint Secretary, M inistry of H ome Affairs 595 General Central Service, Group 'B'- ( Serial No.32 ) (i) Post in any Ministry of Department of Government of India, other than the post in respect of which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the President. (i-a) Posts outside a Ministry or Department of Government of India, other than the posts in respect of which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the president. (ii) Posts in Union Territories other than Delhi Administration, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindive Islands (iii)Delhi Adm inistration- All posts (iv) T he Andaman and Nicobar Islands-All Posts (v) The L akshadweep Administration -All Posts Secretary in the Ministry or Department In respect of posts in an office under the control of a Head of Department directly under the Government. -Head of the Department In respect of other posts - Secretary in the Ministry or Department Administrator Chief Secretary Chief Commissioner Administrator All Group 'B' posts of the Departmentalise d Accounts Offices of the Government of India. ( Serial No.33 ) Chief Controller of Accounts or Joint Controller General of Accounts in a Ministry or Department where there is no Chief Controller of Accounts BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] Recruitment to Group ‘B’ services are conducted by the UPSC . The appointing authority to various Group ‘B’ services is the President of India/respective Ministries/respective Heads like Ministry of Home Affairs, Collector of Customs, Commissioner of Customs etc. 49. In Serial Nos. 28 and 29 of the Schedule, we have the Union Territories Service known as Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar I slands, Lakshadweep, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli Civil Services (DANICS) and Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Laks hdweep, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli Police Services (DAN IPS). In the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India, it is stated as under:- “a. …….DANICS/DANIPS officers are posted in Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshdweep, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli. The recruitment to all the Union Territories for these Group B posts are common. They are also centralise d and the appointing authority is none other than Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. The recruitment to these services is the very same examination meant for the All India Services (IAS/IPS) on the one hand and the Central Civil Services Group A on the other. Any citizen of India is eligible to apply, subject to the conditions prescribed. As per service rules, trans fer undertakings throughout the Union Territories covered under DANICS/DANIPS is taken from these officers. b.This is the reason why the Union of India while i nviting applications for recruitment considers all candidates, including reserved candidates on all India basis. Group B cadre of DANICS and DANIPS is the feeder cadre for IAS and IPS respectively. They retire invariably in these offices, some of them reaching high positions in the central government. c.As indicated above recruitment to the All India Services, C CS Group A as well as CCS Group B (Gazetted) is conducted through UPSC in the Civil Services Examination, the applicants are common when the applications are made, every aspirant seeks recruitment to the services and it is only as per the marks and ranking that allocations are made eventually to All India Services, Group A and Group B. Therefore, when UPSC undertakes the recruitment, it is naturally a PAN I ndia recruitment and therefore it is necessary to seek applications including from reserved candidates from all over India.” 5 5 Para No. 6(ii) of the Counter Affidavit filed by th e Union of India at Pg. No.4-5 597 Central Civil Services – Group C:- 50. There are five services under Central Civil Services – Group ‘C’ under CCS (CCA) Rules. Some of the posts noted in Group ‘C’ and their appointing authorities are as under:- PART III - Central Civil Services, Group 'C' (Except for Civilians in Defence Services) Description of service (2) Appointin Authority (3) Description of service (2) Appointing Authority (3) Central Secretariat Clerical Service, Upper Division and Lower Division Grade (Serial No.1 ) Deputy Secretary or Director, Cadre Authority General Central Service, Group ‘C’ ( Serial No.4 ) (i) Posts in the Ministry/Department of Government other than the posts in respect of which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the President (ii) Posts in non-Secretariat Office other than posts in respect of which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the President (iii) Posts in Union Territories (iv) All Group ‘C’ posts of the Departmentalized Accounts Office of the Government of India Deputy Secretary or Director in the Ministry/Departm ent of Government Head of Office Head of Office of such other authority as may be specified by the Administrator. Controller of Accounts or Deputy Controller General of Accounts in a Ministry or Department where there is no Controller of Accounts. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] Insofar as Group ‘C’ services of Union of India are conc erned, they are recruited by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) which is the recruiting agency under DoPT. Members of these services get promoted to CCS – Group ‘B’. In the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India, it is stated as under:- “a. ……Recruitment to posts in Group C arise out of requisition made by the concerned ministries all over India. Th ese requisitions upon reaching the Staff Selection Commission are processed and selection takes place and appointments are made. Even from these appointees undertaking for all India transfer liability is taken. As these are posts under Cent ral Government and these employees are liable to be transferred anywhere in the country and the recruitment being centralised for all such posts in the country, it had been consistent policy of the Union of India to have PAN India eligibility. b. The posts in CCS Group C are in the subordinate servi ces. The equivalent in the Union Territory of Delhi is the Del hi Administrative Subordinate Services (DASS) and the recruiting agency in the place of Staff Selection Commission is the Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB). Members of Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services are the feeder cadre for Central Civil Services Group B (DANICS). It is for these reasons that the policy is consistently adopted.” 6 Central Civil Services – Group D:- 51. Class IV employees now referred to as Multi-Tas king Staff (MTS) come under this category. Some of the posts noted in Group ‘D’ and their appointing a uthorities are as under:- 6 Para No. 6(iii) of the Counter Affidavit filed by the Union of India at Pg. No.5-6 599 52. As pointed out earlier, there is centralised recruitment conducted by UPSC for the Central Civil Services in Group ‘A’ and Gr oup ‘B’. For this centralised recruitment, applications are invited from candidates across the country and Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes of al l the States/Union Territories are entitled to apply for the r eserved posts. Recruitment to various posts in Group ‘A’ and Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) categories for services in States/Union Territories are presently filled only through UPSC by centralised recruitment. After recruitment, the Group ‘A’ and Group ‘B’ officers are posted across the country wherever there are offices of Central Government. 53.Services mentioned at Serial No.28 that is Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service , Grade-II(DANICS ) are Group ‘B’ civil services. DANICS officers are posted at Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. DANICS - Group ‘B’ civil service officers are directly recruited through the Central Civil Services examination conducted by UPSC. Since DANICS is a centralised P A R T IV - C entral C ivil Services, Gro up 'D ' (Except for C ivilians in D efence Services) Description of service (2) Appointing Authority (3) General Central Service, Group ‘D’ ( Serial N o.1 ) (i) Posts in Ministries or D epartments of Governm ent other than posts in respect of which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the President. (ii) Posts in non-Secretariat Offices other than posts in respect of w hich specific provision has been m ade by a general or special order of the President. (iii) Po sts in Un ion T errito ries (iv) All G roup ‘D’ posts of the Departm entalized Accounts O ffices of the Government of India Under S ecretary Head of O ffice H ead o f O ffice o r such o th er authority as m a y be specified by the A dm i ni stra tor Deputy Controller of Accounts or Assistant C ontroller G eneral of Accounts in a M inistry or Department where there is no D eputy Controller of Accounts . BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] recruitment conducted through UPSC naturally applications are invited from the candidates across the country including reserved candidates of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. 54. Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands Police Services (DANIPS ) are recruited directly through centralised civil servic es examination conducted by UPSC. DANIPS are posted at Delhi and other Union Territories – Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep Islands, Daman and Diu and Dadar and Nagar Haveli. The cadre strength is controlled by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Governme nt of India. Two-thirds of DANIPS are filled by direct recruitment and remaining are promoted from non-gazetted police officers of Union Terri tory of Delhi and other Union Territories. Since, DANIPS officers are recruited through a centralised recruitment conducted through UPSC, applications are invited from candidates from across the country including reserved candidates of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of all the State s and Union Territories. Thus, up to Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) of Central Civil Services including the Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) services of Union Territories, there is Centralised Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC with PAN INDIA reservation. 55. Serial No.32, Group ‘B’ of CCS (CCA) Rules refers to General Central Services. At the risk of repetition, we may usef ully refer to Serial No.32 which reads as under:- Serial No. 32 General Central Service, Group 'B' - (i) Post in a ny Ministry of Departm ent of Government of India, other than the post in respect o f which specific provision has been made by a general or special order of the President. (i-a) Posts outside a M inistry or D epartment of Governm ent of India, othe r than t he posts in respect of w hich specific provision has been made by a gener al or special order of the president. (ii) Posts in U nion Territories other than D elhi Administration, the Andaman and N icobar Islands and the Laccadive, M inicoy and A mindive Islands (iii) Delhi Administration-A ll posts (iv) The Anda man and Nicobar Islands- A ll Posts (v) The Lakshadw eep Ad ministration-All P osts Secretary in the M inistry or D epartment In respect of posts in an office under the control of a Head of D epartment directly under the Government. -Head of the Department In respect of other post s - Secretary in the M inistry or D epartment A dministr ator C hief Secretary C hief Com missio ner A dministr ator 601 As seen from the above, Serial No.32(i) and (i-a) relates to the posts under the Government of India for which the appointing authority is the Secretary in the Ministry or Department/Head of the Department respectively. Serial No.32 (ii) of Central Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1965 relates to “Posts in Union Territories other than Delhi Administration, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindive Islands” . The appointing authority is shown to be the ‘Administrator’. Serial No.32 (iii) to (v) relate to ‘All posts’ in Delhi administration, Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Lakshadweep administration respectively. Serial No.32(ii) posts in the Union Territories (other than Delhi Administration, the Anda man & Nicobar Islands and the Laacadive, Minicoy and Amindive Islands) Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) posts for which recruitment is conducted by UPSC. Since there is centralised recruitment conducted by UPSC fo r Group ‘B’ (Gazetted), naturally applications are invited from the candidates across the country including reserved candidates of Scheduled Castes/Schedules Tribes from all the States/Union Territories. Up to the level of Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) of Central Civil Services, since there is centralised recruitment for which there is PAN INDIA reservation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes from any State/ Union Territory are entitled to apply for the reserved post s for Group ‘B’ examinations conducted by UPSC. 56. When it comes to services under Union Territories, there are so many other services like teaching, clerical cadre, police services, Medical Officers, Health Services, Stenographers, Typists, services under the Revenue department, services under public-sector undert akings, services under the municipalities and the corporations in the Union Territories and various other services which are concerned with the administration of Union Territories. These services under the Union Territories would fall under Group ‘B’, Group ‘C’ and Grou p ‘D’ and their recruitment is within the exclusive domain of the respective Union Territories. Though the government servants under the Union Territories are governed by Central Civil Services Rules, the service s under the Union Territories are essentially different from All India Services. For recruitment to services under respective Union Territorie s, there are different modes of recruitment for the different Union Territories. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] 57. This Court posed the question whether there is other category of employees in UT administration and what is the practice followed for recruitment. In response to the question, Union of India, on instructions, filed the following response:- For the above response that there is PAN India reservation of the reserved candidates for recruitment by Union Territories of Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and NCT of Delhi, no authenticated documents were produced to substantiate the same. When there are Pre sidential Orders notifying the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for Union Territories of Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, calling for application from the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates from a ll over India for the reserved posts of services under various Union Territories, be it Group ‘B’ or Group ‘C’, is not in accordance with the constitutional scheme. SCOPE OF SC/ST RESERVATION IN UTs 1. Puducherry : Reserved posts confined to local reserved candidates. 2. Chandigarh : Reserved posts filled up by candidates from all India. 3. Daman & Diu : Reserved posts confined to local reserved candidates for Group C posts. For Group B it is opened to candidates from all India but local candidates get additional 20 marks. 4. Dadra & Nagar Haveli : Reserved posts confined to local reserved candidates for Group C posts. For Group B it is opened to candidates from all India but local candidates get additional 20 marks. 5. Lakshadweep : Reserved posts confined to local reserved candidates. 6. A & N Islands : For Group C posts locally reserved. 7. NCT of Delhi : Reserved posts filled up by candidates from all India. 603 58. For Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts falling within the services of the Union Territories, recruitment is made by the Staff Selection Board of respective Union Territories. For instance, let me refer to the Staff Selection Board of UT Administration of Daman and Diu whose home page reads as under:- “In exercise of the powers conferred by the provision of Article 239 of the Constitution of India, the Administrator of Daman & Diu is pleased to make following rules to regulate the method of recruitment to all Group ‘B’ and ‘C’ categories of posts under the Administration of Daman & Diu. It aims to “ensure a uniform and transparent proces s and procedures for recruitment of all Group ‘B’ and ‘C’ categories of posts under the Administration of Daman and Diu through an autonomous body, without disturbing the existing recruitment processes and procedures and for ensuring that cumu lative outcome of the recruitment is to provide just and fair opportunities to all the candidates and for matters connected there with or incidental thereto 7.” 59. In response to the question posed by the court, Union of India filed response affidavit stating that in Union Territories Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli, for Group ‘B’, it is opened to candidates from all over India. Local candidates with domicile cer tificate get additional twenty per cent marks. Response filed by the Union of India that there is PAN India reservation for Group ‘B’ servi ces of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli, no authenticated documents/format of any application for Group ‘B’ posts conducted by Daman and Diu was produced before us. Even assuming that there is such PAN India reservation for recruitment of Group ‘B’ conducted by the Union Territory of Daman and Diu, when there are Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes as notified in the Presidential Order (Reorganisation Act, 1987 in respect of SCs/STs), there cannot be PAN India reservation as i t is not in accordance with the constitutional scheme. 60. Pointing out that services in the Union Territories are different from All India Services and that the mode of recruitment are also different, in para (29) of Subhash Chandra and another v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board and others (2009) 15 SCC 458, it was held as under:- 7 https://daman.nic.in/staff-selection-board-daman-di u.aspx#downloads (27.06.2018) BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] “29. Concededly, in respect of education or service, there exists a distinction between State Services and State-run institut ions including the Union Territory Services and Union Territory-run institutions on the one hand, and the Central Civil Service s and the institutions run by the Central Government on the other. Whereas in the case of the former, the reservation wheth er for admission or appointment in an institution and employment or appointment in the services or posts in a State or Union Territory must confine to the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as notified in the Presidential Orders but in respect of All India Services, Central Civil Services or admission to an institution run and founded by the Central Government, the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other reserved category candidates irrespective of their State for which they have been notified are entitled to the benefits there of. It is not denied or disputed that services in the Union Territory is essentially different from All India Services. It is also beyond any controversy that machinery for recruitment is also dif ferent. Indisputably again, not only the conditions of recruitment but also conditions of service differ.” I am in full agreement with the view taken by Justice Sinha in Subhash Chandra case . 61. Rule 3 of Delhi Administration Subordinate Services (DASS) Rules, 1967 deals with constitution of services and its classification in Delhi Administration. As per Rule 3(3) of DASS Rules, the post in Grade-I, Class-II Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) and those in Grades II, III and IV shall be Central Civil Services Posts. But as noted earlier, as per Serial No.32 – General Central Service, Group ‘B’, insofar as Delhi Administration – All Posts (Serial No. 32 (iii)), the Appointing Authority is the Chief Secretary . The subordinate services in the National Capital Territory of Delhi though “Central Civil Services”, they are neither All India Services nor services under Union of India so as to attract Pan India Reservation. 62. Even in the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India, by referring to Group ‘C’ services, it is stated that CCS – Group ‘C’ are in the subordinate services and there are equivalent services in the Union Territory of Delhi. For recruitment of other employees i n the Union Territory of Delhi, there is Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services 605 (DASS) and the recruiting agency is Delhi Subordinate Staff Selection Board (DSSSB). Members of Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services are stated to be the feeder cadre for Central Civil Services – Group ‘B’ (DANICS). 31 Merely because members of Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services are the feeder category for DANICS, PAN India reservation cannot be extended to Delhi Subordinate Service s or to services under various Union Territories. Likewise, merel y because, DANICS and DANIPS (Serial Nos. 28 and 29 of Group ‘B’ Services) are the feeder category for IAS and IPS, it cannot be said that the Pan India Reservation is applicable to services under National Capital Territory of Delhi. 63. So far as Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts falling under t he services of the Union Territories, recruitment is done by the respective Staff Selection Board of respective Union Territories. Serial No.4 (iii) – ‘ Posts in Union Territories’ of Group ‘C’ in CCS (CCA) R ules is shown and the appointing authority is stated as Head of the Office of such other authority as may be specified by the Admini strator. Merely because the posts in the Union Territories and the appointing authority are shown in Group ‘C’ in CCS (CCA) Rules, that do es not mean that those Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts are availabl e for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of all the States/Union Territories. For recruitment of Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts of services under the respective Union Territories, since the examination is conducted by the respective Union Territories like Delhi Subordinate Staff Selection Board and other Union Territories Staff Selection Boards of respective Union Territories, reservation of posts of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes must be confined only to those Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes as notified in the Presidential Order of the respective Union Territories. For recruitment of Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts under various Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi, there cannot be PAN INDIA reservation of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, lest, it would defeat the very object of the Presidential Orders issue d specifying the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for respective Union Territories. 64. As pointed out earlier, services under the Union Territorie s though they are Central Government services, they are servic es under the respective Union Territories and not under the direct control of Union of India/different Ministries. Procedure for recruitment to the various posts for the services of Union Territories are different as followed by BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] respective Union Territories. The persons appointed for the services of Union Territories might be governed by CCS (CCA) Rules; but they are employees of respective Union Territories. The appointing authorities are the authorities under the administration of Union Territories and not under the Ministries of Union of India. Central Civil Ser vices are the services directly under Union of India. Contrarily, various services under the Union Territories are the services under the resp ective Union Territories. Such services under Union Territories cannot be said to be Central Civil Services that is services under Union of India to extend the benefit of PAN India reservation for recruitment to the servi ces under respective Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi. 65. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of A rticle 341, the President issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) U nion Territories Order, 1951 in the Presidential Order specifying Scheduled Castes in relation to Delhi and the thirty-six castes/groups notified are as under:- Part 1 – Delhi Throughout the Union Territory 1. Adi Dharmi 19. Kachhandha 2. Agria 20. Kanjar or Giarah 3. Aheria 21. Khatik 4. Balal 22. Koli 5. Banjara 23. Lalbegi 6. Bawaria 24. Madri 7. Bazigar 25. Mallah 8. Bhangi 26. Mazhabi 9. Bhil 27. Meghwal 10. Chamar, l Chanwan Chmanr, Jatya or Jatav Chamar, Mochi Ramadasia, Ravidasi, Reghgrh or Raigharh 28. Naribut 11. Chohra (Sweeper) 29. Nat (Rana), Badi 12. Chuhra (Balmiki) 30. Pasi 13. Dhanak or Dhanuk 31. Perna 14. Dhobi 32. Sansi or Bhedkut 15. Dom 33. Sapera 16. Gharrami 34. Sikligar 17. Julaha (Weaver) 35. Singiwala or Kalbelila 18. Karbirpanthi 36. Sirkiband 607 In relation to Delhi, there are thirty-six castes notified as Scheduled Castes in the Presidential Order. The members of the Scheduled Castes in Delhi are drawn from castes, races and by virtue of the Pres idential Order pertaining to Delhi, they attain the status of the Scheduled Caste. In view of the Presidential Order issued for the Scheduled Castes to Delhi, only those Scheduled Castes can claim the benefit of reservation in the employment under the Union Territory of Delhi who are notified in the Presidential Order. Neither the Delhi Government nor the court can add any caste or group to the list of Scheduled Castes noti fied in the Presidential Order. Once a Presidential Order has been is sued under Article 341(1) of the Constitution, any addition or de letion to the Presidential Order can only be made by the Parliament by law as provided under Article 341(2) and in no other manner. Merely because, De lhi Subordinate Services is a feeder category for DANICS, t here cannot be Pan India Reservation of the SCs and STs for the services under Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ categories, for which recruitment are made by the Delhi Subordinate Staff Selection Board (DSSSB). 66. Likewise, the Presidential Order has notified the following Scheduled Castes for the Union Territory of Chandigarh, Daman a nd Diu, Puducherry and Dadra and Nagar Haveli:- Part II – Chandigarh 1. Adi Dharmi 19. Khatik 2. Bangali 20. Kori or Koli 3. Barar, Burar or Berar 21. Marjia or Marecha 4. Batwal, Barwala 22. Mazhabi 5. Bauria or Bawaria 23. Megh 6. Bazigar 24. Nat 7. Balmiki, Chura or Bhangi 25. Od 8. Bhanjra 26. Pasi 9. Chamar, Jatia Chamar, Rehgar, Raigar, Ramdasi or Ravidasi 27. Perna 10. Chanal 28. Pherera BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] 11. Dagi 29. Sanhai 12. Darain 30. Sanhal 13. Dhanak 31. Sansoi 14. Dhogri, Dhangri or Siggi 32. Sansi, Bhedkut or Manesh 15. Dumna, Mahasha or Doom 33. Sapela 16. Gagra 34. Sarera 17. Gandhila or Gnadil Gondola 35. Sikligar 18. Kabirpanthi or Julaha 36. Sirkiband PART III – Daman and Diu 1. Bhangi (Hadi) 4. Mahyavanshi (Vankar) 2. Chambhar, Mochi 5. Mang 3. Mahar The Schedule - Puducherry 1. Adi Andhra 9. Pallan 2. Adi Dravida 10. Parayan, Sambavar 3. Chakkiliyan 11. Samban 4. Jambuvulu 12. Thoti 5. Kuravan 13. Valluvan 6. Madiga 14. Vetan 7. Mala, Mala Masti 15. Vetriyan 8. Paky 16. Puthirai Vannan The Schedule – Dadra and Nagar Haveli 1. Bhangi 3. Mahar 2. Chamar 4. Mahayavanshi 609 67. Let me take the case of Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The Constitution (Andaman and Nicobar Islands) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1959 has notified the following tribes or tribal communities who have been included in the Schedule for the Andaman & Nicobar Islands:- When Andaman & Nicobar Islands is recruiting persons to the services of Group ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ under its administration, it has to necessarily follow the policy of recruiting members from amongst the Scheduled Tribes who are notified as Scheduled Tribes in the Presidential Notification for Andaman and Nicobar Islands. It will not be appropriate to extend the benefit of reservation to the SCs and STs from other States/ Union Territories, lest it would deprive the notified Scheduled Tribes of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. 68. It may be that the candidates recruited by the respective Union Territories for Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ may become the feeder categories for further promotion in Group ‘A’ and Group ‘B’ of All India Services respectively in the Central Civil Services. The fact that the candidates who are recruited by the respective Union Territories become the feeder categories for further promotion in the Central Civil Services is not a ground for extending the benefit of all India reservation to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for the reserved posts in the respective Union Territories. Be it noted that the candidates recruited by the various State Governments under Group ‘A’ of respective State services become the feeder category for IAS and IPS. The persons recruited for Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ by the respective Union Territories stand on the same footing as that of the candidates so recruite d by the various States where only the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Trib es of the respective States can apply. The Schedule 1. The Andamanese (including Chariar or Chari, Kora, Tabo or Bo, Yere, Kede, Bea Balawa, Bojigiyab, Juwai and Kol 4. Sentinelese 2. Jarawas 5. The Nicoberese 3. Onges 6. The Shompens BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] 69. A letter dated 10.05.2013 by Special Secretary (Services) addressed to all the Secretaries/Heads of Departments of NCT of Delhi has been filed by the Union of India. The letter relate s to the subject “Reservation policy to be followed with regard to SCs/S Ts in civil posts under GNCTD”. The said letter refers to the judgment in Pushpa’s case and states that the Ministry of Law and Justice has opined that the law declared by the Supreme Court in Pushpa’s case applies to the NCT of Delhi and that Pushpa’s case cannot be ignored. Relevant portion of the said letter reads as under:- “GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI (SERVICES DEPARTMENT BRANCH-IV) 7 TH LEVEL, B-WING, DELHI SECRETARIAT, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI – 110002 No. F. 19(6)/2012/S-IV/883 Dated: 10-05-2013 …… The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi follo ws the guidelines and instructions issued by the Government of India from time to time in matters regarding reservation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in recruitment to various civil posts in Government of Delhi. Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, in the context of order dated 11.02.2005 of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled S. Pushpa & Ors. Vs. Sivachanmugavelu & Ors. stated vide their letter dated 01.06.2005 that the matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law & Justice (Department of Legal Affairs). That the Ministry had opined that the law declared by the Supreme Court of India cited above, applies to the National Capital Territory of Delhi. This wa s accordingly conveyed to the departments vide this department’s letter No.F.16(73)/97-S-III/710 dated 30.06.2005, stating that all the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribe candidates irrespective of their nativity, are el igible for reservation to the civil posts under Govt. of NCT of Delhi, which are reserved for SC/ST candidates and appropriate action for recruitment may be taken accordingly. 611 Subsequently, in view of order dated 04.08.2009 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarv Rural & Urban Welfar e Society vs. Union of India & Ors. and of the Hon’ble High Court dated 12.09.2012 in WP(C) No.5390/2010 under consideration in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India. Now, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, vide its letter No.14012/09/2012-Delhi-I dated 03.04.2013 has informed that the subject matter has been re-examined in consultation with Ministry of Law & Justice. In this matter Learned Attorney General for India has given his opinion dated 18.02.2013 (copy enclosed), which is self-explanatory and has been approved by the Hon’ble Minister of Law & Justice, Govt. of India. The opinion, inter alia, states that having regard to the order in the State of Uttaranchal’s case, till this issue is resolved by a larger bench, the decision in S. Pushpa case cannot be ignored. Ministry of Home Affairs has conveyed that it has been decided to proceed according to this opinion. Copy of above mentioned letter of the Ministry of Home Affairs is circulated for information & necessary action accordingly. Yours faithfully, (Kailash Chandra) Spl. Secretary (Services) Dated: 10-05-2013 …..” 70. PAN India reservation probably is followed by NCT of Delhi in its recruitment based on the above letter dated 10.05.2013. Si nce I have taken the view that the decision in Pushpa’s case is not a correct decision extending PAN India reservation for the reserved posts recruited by NCT of Delhi or any other Union Territories is against the Presidential Orders issued under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India and against the constitutional scheme. 71. As discussed earlier in para (8), in case of Union Territories, though administrative control to certain extent is exercised by the Union of India, Union Territories do not lose their identity as an entit y. The existing practice of PAN INDIA reservation followed in Delhi and BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] Chandigarh is against the constitutional scheme and also agai nst the executive instructions dated 06.08.1984 and 22.02.1985 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. 72. As pointed our earlier, the Ministry of Home Affairs in its circular dated 06.08.1984 addressed to all the State Government s and Union Territories administration stated that SCs and STs on migration from the State of his origin to other State will not loose his status as SCs/ STs; but will be entitled to the concession/benefits to the SCs/STs from the State of his origin and not from the State where he has migrated. The same thing was reiterated in the letter dated 22.02.1985 of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. If PAN India reservation is to be extended to the Union Territories like Delhi, Chandigarh, Puducherry, Andaman & Nicobar Islands or Daman & Diu for Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ services for which recruitment are made by the resp ective Union Territories, the very object of the Constitutional Scheme of upliftment of the SCs/STs of these Union Territories will be defeate d. All India reservation to the services under the Union Territories including the Union Territory of Delhi will be against the mandate of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution and against the Constitutional Scheme. 73. Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee are applicable to the States and they are applicable with equal force to the Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi. There cannot be any distinction between the States and the Union Territories. Likewise, there can be no distinction between Union Territory of Delhi and other Union Territories. When Presidential Orders of Schedul ed Castes/ Scheduled Tribes are notified for various Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi extending PAN India reservation to the employment falling under the services of Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi, will be against the Constitutional scheme and the law laid down in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee. 74. Article 16(4) of the Constitution has to yield to t he constitutional mandate of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution. The Presidential Order issued under Article 341 in regard to Scheduled Castes and Article 342 in regard to Scheduled Tribes cannot be varied by anyone or by the Court. Only the Parliament by law include or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification issued under Article 341 (1) and Article 342(1) respectively 613 any caste, race or tribe or parts or group within any caste, race or tribe. The Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes thus specified in relation to one State or Union Territory does not carry the status in another State or Union Territory. When the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes are specified for each State in relation to one State or Union Territory, neither the State legislature, the administration of the Union Territories and nor the courts can include or exclude other Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes so notified in the Presidential Order. Providing all India reservation to the services of Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi, would be against the mandate of Articles 341 and 342 and the Presidential Orders issued thereon. If that is permitted, it would amount to addition or alteration of the Presidential Order which is impermissible and violative of the Constitutional Scheme. 75.It is the responsibility of each State/Union Territory to provide for such reservation/affirmative action by positive discre tion to bring backward classes/Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tri bes in the respective States/areas to provide socio-economic empowerment. If the reservation to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are to be extended to all categories of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes all over India or to the migrants then there is every possibility of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of other developed States and Union Territories squandering reservations to the Schedule d Castes and Scheduled Tribes who are disadvantaged in the respective States/Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi. If this is permitted, it would defeat the very object of providing reservation to the disadvantaged Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a particular State or Union territory. The enabling provision of Article 16(4) of the Constitution has to yield to the constitutional scheme of Article 341 and Article 342 of the Constitution. 76. Conclusion:- · Insofar as the States, I agree with the majority view that a person who is recognised as a member of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes in his original State, will be entitled t o all the benefits of reservation under the Constitution in that State only and not in other States/Union Territories and not entitled to the benefits of reservation in the migrated State/Union Territory. BIR SINGH v. DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. [R. BANUMATHI, J.] · Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee are applicable to the States and they are applicable with equal force to the Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi. There cannot be any distinction between the States and the Union Territories. Likewise, there can be no distinction between Union Territory of Delhi and other Union Territories. When Presidential Orders of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes are notified for various Union Territories including Union Territory of D elhi extending PAN India reservation to the employment falling under the services of Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi, will be against the Constitutional scheme and the law laid down in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee. · Since there is centralised recruitment upto Group ‘B’ (Gazetted) services conducted by UPSC for the Central Civi l Services posts in the States/Union Territories of India, there has to be necessarily PAN India reservation for Scheduled Caste s/ Scheduled Tribes for those recruitment conducted by UPSC. Sofaras Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts falling under services of Union Territories including Union Territory of Delhi for w hich recruitment is conducted by the respective Union Territories, benefit of reservation in employment (Article 16(4)) is to be extended only to those Scheduled Castes/Scheduled T ribes specified in the Presidential Order of the respecti ve Union Territories. Insofar as the posts recruited by the Staff Selection Board of the respective Union Territories including the Union Territory of Delhi, there cannot be PAN India reservation for Group ‘B’, Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts falling under t he services of various Union Territories and such PAN India reservation would be against the constitutional scheme and Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee. Divya Pandey Referred question.answered.