Updated February 22nd, 2024 at 17:02 IST

Manipur HC Orders Deletion of Paragraph From 2023 Order on Inclusion of Meitei Community in ST List

The HC ordered deletion of a paragraph from a 2023 order that urged the state to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) list.

Reported by: Digital Desk
Edited by: Kriti Dhingra
The HC ordered deletion of a paragraph from a 2023 order that urged the state to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) list. | Image:ANI/Twitter
Advertisement

Imphal: The Manipur High Court on Wednesday ordered deletion of a paragraph from a 2023 order that urged the state to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) list, saying the paragraph was in conflict with the stance of the Supreme Court's constitution bench, news agency PTI reported.

The March 27 2023 court directive, which reportedly acted as catalyst for the ethnic unrest that claimed over 200 lives, was rescinded by a single-judge bench of Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu during a review petition hearing, and the contentious paragraph from the last year's verdict, instructing the state to expedite consideration of Meitei community inclusion, was deemed for deletion.

Advertisement

The paragraph of the last year verdict stated:

The state government "shall consider the case of the petitioners for inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks" from the date of receipt of the order.

Justice Gaiphulshillu's ruling on February 21 emphasised the necessity of removing the directive, pointing to the Government of India's stipulated procedure for Scheduled Tribe list amendments. "Accordingly, the direction given at para no. 17(iii) needs to be deleted and is ordered accordingly for deletion of the para no. 17(iii) of the judgment and order dated March 27, 2023...", PTI quoted Justice Gaiphulshillu as saying.

Referring to the constitutional protocol detailed in the Ministry of Tribal Affairs' 2013-14 report, the court highlighted the need for alignment with the Supreme Court's constitutional interpretation.

Advertisement

"...I am satisfied and of the view that the direction given at Para no. 17(iii) of the single-judge dated March 27 2023...which is impugned herein needs to be reviewed, as the direction given at para no. 17(iii) of the single judge is against the observation made in the constitution bench of the Supreme Court," the high court said in its 19-page verdict.

The high court's detailed 19-page verdict underlined the legislative limitations on judicial interference concerning Scheduled Tribe classifications, as outlined by a constitution bench ruling in November 2000.

Advertisement

A part of the verdict from the Supreme Court's Constitution bench in November 2000 had said:

"Courts cannot and should not expand jurisdiction to deal with the question as to whether a particular caste, sub-caste; a group or part of tribe or sub-tribe is included in any one of the Entries mentioned in the Presidential Orders issued under Article 341 and 342 particularly so when in Clause (2) of the said Article, it is expressly stated that said orders cannot be amended or varied except by law made by Parliament"

The constitution bench had elucidated that courts should not overstep their jurisdiction in determining such categorisations.

Following several incidents of violence in the state after the March 27 order, a series of petitions, including challenges to the high court directive, were presented to the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

The apex court, on May 17 of the same year, denounced the high court's directive as "obnoxious" and considered staying the order due to its perceived inaccuracies.

A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, according to PTI, had said:

Advertisement

"I will tell you (lawyers) one thing that the high court order was incorrect... I think we have to stay the order of the high court. The high court order is absolutely wrong." 

The apex court bench had made clear it will not deal with legal issues arising out of the Manipur High Court's decision on grant of reservation to majority Meiteis as the pleas challenging the order were pending with the larger division bench there.

Advertisement

Amid the legal discourse, the Supreme Court refrained from addressing the core legal aspects arising from the Manipur High Court's decision, as the challenges were pending before a larger division bench.

The court invited tribal participation, particularly from the Kukis, in the ongoing legal proceedings related to the intra-court appeals.

Advertisement

Meiteis account for about 53 percent of Manipur's population and live mostly in the Imphal Valley, while tribals, which include the Nagas and the Kukis, constitute 40 percent of the state's population and reside mainly in the hill districts. 

Advertisement

Published February 22nd, 2024 at 17:02 IST