SRISH KUMAR CHOUDHURY versus STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS.

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 576 · Decided: 23-02-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

SRISH KUMAR CHOUDHURY 
r 
A 
v. 
STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 23, 1990 
B 
[RANGANATH MISRA, M.M. PUNCHHI AND 
---{ 
S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Constitution of India-Articles 341 and 342/ Items 15-18-Laskar 
Community-Inclusion in the list of Scheduled Tribes-Entertainment 
-:: 
of 
c 
The appellant is a resident of Tripnra State. He asserted that he 
belonged to the Laskar commnnity which was included in St.ate records ~ 
.. 
in the Deshi Tripura commnnity and in the former State of Tripura this 
community had always been treated as Scheduled Tribes, and the 
~ 
members of the commnnity freely· enjoyed all the benefits available to 
members of the Schednled Tribes until 1976 when the State Government 
decided to treat members of this community as not belonging to the 
Scheduled Tribes and issued instructions to the state authorities to 
implement the Government decision. Being aggrieved the appellant 
)-
filed a writ petition before the High Court in a representative cappacity 
praying for appropriate directions directing the State Government to 
E continne to treat the appellant and members of Laskar community as 
belonging to Scheduled Tribes and extend all the benefits available to 
Scheduled Tribes to this community. In support of his claim the appel-
·.,,-
lant relied upon the two circulars of the erstwhile State of Tripura dated 
December 1930 and February 1941 as also the census report of the 
ex-state of Tripura, besides the ·authorities of this Court. The respon-
y 
F dent took the plea that Laskar community was never included in the 
Scheduled Tribes Order and as such there was no question of excluding 
it from the List. After considering the rival contentions of the parties 
coupled with the historical background bearing on the subject, the 
statement made by the Advocate-General that the Memos will be given 
prospective operation, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition. 
G Hence this appeal by Special Leave. This appeal initially came up before 
a two judges Bench for final hearing when on a statement made by the >-
Connsel for the Union of India that a representation made by the appel-
lant and members of~is community for inclusion their caste-Laskar, in 
the Presidential order under Article 342 is being looked into and is 
being placed before the Parliamentary Committee for review of the 
H position, the Court disposed of the appeal in terms of the assnarance 
576 
_ 
. ..( 
S.K. CHOUDHURY v. STATE OF TRIPURA 
577 
given on behalf of the Union. It was.specifically stated in the Court's 
order that in case the community is not included in the Presidential 
Order, it would be open io the appellant to take such action as may be 
available to him in law. Nothing having happened at governmental 
level, with the consent of the parties, the order disposing of the appeal 
was recalled and the appeal has thus now come up for hearing. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD: Reservation has become important in view of the in-
creasing competition in society and that probably had led to the 
anxiety of the appellant and the people in his community to claim 
reservation. [586G I 
In Tripura the Scheduled Tribes within the meaning of the defini-
tion given in Article 366 of the Constitution have been 'Jamatia, Noatia, 
Riang and Tripura/Tripuri/Tippera' apart from 15 other tribes. It is 
the case of the appellant that Laskars are a part of the tribe named as 
'Tripura, Tripuri and Tippera' covered by Entry 18. (5810] 
This Court should not assume jurisdiction and enter into an 
enquiry to determine whether the three terms indicated in the Presi-
dential Order include Deshi Tripura which covers the Laskar com-
mnnity; but it is appropriate to commend to the authorities concerned 
that as and when the question is reviewed it should be examined 
whether the claim of the appellant representing the Laskar community 
to be included in the scheduled tribes is genuine and should, therefore, 
be entertained. [586F-G] 
Even if historically this tribe was covered by the general descrip-
tion of Tripura, that by itself may not justify its inclusion in the Order 
as a Scheduled Tribe. That is an additional feature which has weighed 
with us in taking our decision not to interfere in the matter. [587C] 
B. Basavalingappa v. D. Munichinnappa, [1966] I SCR 316; 
Bhaiyalal v. Harikishan Singh and Ors., [1965] 2 SCR 877; Parsram 
and Anr. v. Shivchand and Ors., [1969) I SCC 20; Kishorilal Hans v. 
Raja Ram Singh and Ors., [197

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.