The Manipur High Court recently modified its 2023 order in part, whereby a contentious direction was issued to the state government for considering the inclusion of Meiteis in the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list.
The Bench comprising Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu was hearing a review petition lodged against para 17(iii) of the decision dated March 27, 2023 rendered by Acting Chief Justice M.V. Muralidharan in a petition by the Meitei Tribe Union.
Reportedly, the impugned direction was to the effect that the state shall consider the case of the petitioners for inclusion of the Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list on an expeditious basis. Notably, the ethnic conflict between the Meiteis and the tribal Kuki-Zo communities in the northeastern state erupted following this High Court direction..
Withdrawing the direction, the Manipur High Court observed that after joint perusal of the procedure laid down by the Indian Government for inclusion in or exclusion from the list of Scheduled Tribe issued under Article 342 of the Constitution of India in Clause (g) of the Annual Report, 2013-14 of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India which has been also reproduced herein above and observation made by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra V. Milind & Ors. [(2001) 1 SCC 4], the HIgh Court is of the view that the direction given at Para No. 17(iii) needs to be reviewed, as the direction given at Para No. 17(iii) of the Single Judge bench is against the observation made in the Constitution Bench of the top court.
The bench added that considering the same, the direction given at Para No. 17(iii) needs to be deleted. Subsequently, it ordered deletion of the Para No. 17(iii) of the judgment and order dated 27.03.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No. 229 of 2023.
The Review Petition was lodged by petitioners from the Meitei community, who were the original writ petitioners themselves. The petitioners sought review on the ground that the direction was barred by the Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court that a judicial direction cannot be issued for inclusion of a tribe in the ST list as it is the sole prerogative of the President.
The plea stated that the Para No. 17(iii) of the judgment dated 27.03.2023 of the court was passed in a misconception of law as the petitioners failed to assist the Court properly at the time of hearing of the said writ petition due to his misconception of fact and law. It added that the direction must be modified as it is not in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Notably, the March 27 order was initially appealed before a Division Bench of the Manipur High Court. Nonetheless, last year, the Chairman, Hill Area Committee (HAC) of the Manipur Legislative Assembly also moved the Supreme Court against the same.
Consecutively, a Supreme Court Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud took strong exception to it. The bench said that the order was not only factually incorrect but also against the principles laid down by the Constitution Benches of the Court on the classification of communities in the SC/ST list.
However, the Supreme Court did not stay the March 27 order, as an appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court had been filed. The petitioners were left at liberty to raise their grievances in the proceedings before the Division Bench. Currently, in pursuance of the order in the review petition, the direction stands deleted and the order modified.