Holding

A person recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in his State of origin is not entitled to claim reservation benefits in another State; the benefit is limited to the State in which the tribe is specified.

Summary

M.C.S. Rao, born in Andhra Pradesh and belonging to the Gouda community, held a Scheduled Tribe certificate and applied for MBBS seats in Maharashtra seeking reservation benefits. His application was rejected because the Gouda community is not listed as a Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra. The petitioner argued that the constitutional provisions (Arts. 341, 342, 15(4)) should allow him to claim the same benefits nationwide. The Court examined the meaning of "in relation to that State" and "for the purposes of this Constitution" and concluded that reservation benefits are confined to the State where the tribe is specified. Consequently, the petitioner was not entitled to the Maharashtra reservation, though the Court left it to the college authorities to decide whether he could continue his studies. The writ petition was disposed of without setting a precedent for other cases.

Issues considered

Whether a person recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in his State of origin is entitled to reservation benefits in another State.
Interpretation of the expressions "in relation to that State" and "for the purposes of this Constitution" in Articles 341 and 342.
Whether the domicile requirement for admission is relevant to the petition.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 14, s. Article 15(4), s. Article 341, s. Article 342

Subjects

Scheduled TribesReservationArticle 341Article 342EqualityState domicileConstitutional interpretation

Judgment

MARR! CHANDRA SHEKHAR RAO A
v.
f DEAN, SETH G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ORS.
----- -
MAY 2, 1990

[SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ., B.C. RAY, L.M. SHARMA, B
P.B. SAWANT AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.]

Constitution of lndta, 1950: Articles 341 and 342-Schedutea
Castes and Scheduled Tribe:t-Reservation-Whether one who is recog-
nised as Scheduled Tribe in the State of origin and birth continues to
have che benefits or privileges or rights in the State of Migration? In-
terpretation of the expressions 'in relation to that State' and 'for the
c
purposes of this Constitution'.

Professional Colleges-Admission to-Maharashtra State Medi-
cal College-Admission to-Applicant belonging to Gouda Com-
munity Scheduled Tribe in A ndhra Pradesh-Gouda Community not D
Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra-Applicant not entitled to claim seat
on the basis of reservation.

The Petitioner was born in Tenali in the Btate of Andhra Pradesh
and belonged to the Gouda Community which is claimed to have been
y ·' recognised as 'Scheduled Tribe' under the Constitution. His father had E
f been issued an Scheduled Tribe Certificate and it is on the basis of the
quota reserved for Scheduled Tribes that he was appointed in the
Fertilizer Corporation of India and later with the Rashtriya Chemical
& Fertilizer, Ltd., and posted in Bombay since 19.6.1978. The
~ Petitioner was also living with his father in Bombay since the age of Dine
years and took his education there upto 12th standard securing 165 F
~.___ marks in the aggregate, in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics.

For the academic year 1989-90 he applit:d for admission to the
M.B.B.S. Course in three colleges tun by the Bombay Municipal
Corporation and one J>y the State of Milharashtra seeking the benefit of
reservation in favour of the Scheduled Tribes. The Petitioner was not G
admitted to any of the colleges though some scheduled tribe candidates
who had secured lesser marks than him were admitted. The reason for
denial of admission to him was that he was not entitled to scheduled
.>-- tribe Status of his ·origin and birth as Gouda was not recognised as
Scheduled Tribe in Milharashtra State.
H

843
844 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

A
Disposing of the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner, this Court,

HELD: Equality is the dictate of our Constitution. Article 14
ensures equality i)l its fullness to all our citizens. State is enjoined not to
'
-~-

B deny to any person equality before law and equal protection of the law
within the territory of India. Where, it is necessary, however, for the
purpose of bringing about real equality of opportunity· between those
who are unequals, certain reservations are necessary and these should -,.
he ensured. Equality under the Constitution is a dynamic concept which
must cover every process of equalisation. Equality must become a living

c
reality for the large masses of the people. Those who are unequal, in
fact, cannot be treated by identical standards; that may be equality in
law but it would certainly not be real equality. Existence of equality of
opportunity depends not merely on the absence of disabilities but on the
-
presence of abilities. Dejure equality must ultimately find its raison ...
d'tre in de facto equality. [848E-GI
D
Balancing mnst be done as between those who need protection and
those who need no protection, i.e., those who belong to advantaged
castes or tribes and those who do not. Treating the determination under
Articles 341 and 342 to be valid for all over the country would be in
negation to the very purpose and scheme and language of Article 341 'I'.
E read with Article 15(4). [85SC-D]

Nothing is surplus in a Constitution and no part should be made
nugatory. Having regard, however, to the purpose and the scheme of
the Constitution which would be just and fair to the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes not only of one State of origin but other states _j__.
F
also where the Scheduled Castes or Tribes migrate in consonance with
the rights of other castes or community, rights would be harmoniously f.
balanced. Reservations should and must be adopted to advance the
prospects of weaker sections of society, but while doing so care should
be taken not to exclude the legitimate expectations of the other segments
G of the community. l858A-BJ

The petitioner is not entitled to be admitted to the Medical Col-
leges in Maharashtra on the basis that he belonged to the scheduled ...
tribe in Andhra Pradesh. The question of petitioner's right to be admit-
ted as being domicile does not fall for consideration. [860EJ
H
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE !MUKHARJI, CJ.] 845

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 989 of 1989.
,) A
I
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia).

Raju Ramachandran, Mrs. Sadhna Ramachandnin and Ravinder
Bhatt for the Petitioner.

Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, S.K. Dholakia. R.P. Bhatt, B
A.S. Bobde, V.A. Gan~al, A.S. Bhasme, Ms. A. Subhashini, V.N.
Ganpule and S. Sukumaran for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ. The issues involved in this
writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution are of seminal
importance for the country and the people. The principles which
should be applicable in governing the prpblem are indisputable. Their
application, however, presents certain amount of anxiety.
the petitioner, a citizen of India, was born on 6th October, 1969
in Tenali in the State of Andhra Pradesh. He belongs to the Gouda D
community also known as "Goudu", it is stated in the petition. This
community is recognised as 'scheduled tribe' in the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, as amended upto date. We are not
concerned with the correctness or otherwise of the factual position on
this aspect in this application. The faher of the petitioner had been
issued a Scheduled Tribe Certificate by the Tasildar, Tenali, Andhra E
Pradesh on 3rd August, 1977. On the basis of the said certificate, the
father of the petitioner was appointed in the Fertilizer Corporation of
India, a public sector undertaking~ on 17th October, 1977 in the
Scheduled Tribes quota. On the 19th June, 1978, the petitioner's
father joined the Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd., a Govern-
ment of India undertaking, under the quota reserved for Scheduled F
Tribes and he has been stationed in Bombay since then. The
petitioner, therefore, came to live in Bombay, in the state of
Maharashtra, since the age of nine years. The petitioner completed his
secondary and higher education in Bombay. In March, 1989, the
petitioner passed the Uth standard examination of the Maharashtra
State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Examination, G
Bombay Divisional Board, securing 165 marks in the aggregate in
Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. For the academic year 1989-90,
. the petitioner submitted his application for three medical colleges in
Bombay which are run by the Bombay Municipal Corporation
(Respondent No. 2 herein) and for one medical college in Bombay run
by the State of Maharashtra (respondent No. 3). The total number of H
846 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

seats in the three medical colleges run by the Municipal Corporation
A
for the MBBS Course is 400 out of which 7% i.e. 28 seats were
reserved for Scheduled Tribes. The total number of seats in the medi-
cal college run by the State of Maharashtra is 200 out of which 7% i.e.
14 seats are reserved for Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner sought and
availed the benefit of the reservation in favour of the Scheduled
B Tribes. The petitioner was however not admitted to the MBBS course
in either the medical colleges run by the Bombay Municipal Corpora-
tion or the State of Maharashtra, though indubitably Scheduled Tribes
candidates who had .secured lesser marks than him had been admitted.
The undisputed reason for denial of admission to the petitioner was
that the petitioner was not entitled to Scheduled Tribe status of his
origin, in which this community is specified as a Scheduled Tribe in the 7 -
c Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.

There is a circular dated 22nd February, 1985 issued by the
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs which, inter alia,
states:
D
"It is also clarified that a Scheduled Castetrribe 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
E ~~~~~~-~~~~~~
has migrated.

The admission forms issued by the Municipal Corporation as well
as Government indicate the requirement of "domicile" of 15 years.
The petitioner states that he has produced a domicile certificate indi-
F eating his stay in Maharashtra for over 10 years since 1978. This issue,
however, is not before this Court in this writ petition. This issue had
not been raised before this Court. In the counter-affidavit filed on
behalfiof the State of Maharashtra, the objection was on the interpreta-
tion of Article 342 of the Constitution and there was no contention
raised on the question of domicile. It is, therefore, necessary to refer
G to Article 342. Article 342 of the Constitution reads as follows:

"342. Scheduled Tribes: (i) The President may with
respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a
State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by
public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities
H or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE (MUKHARJI, CJ.) 847

which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed
A
to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to-that State or Union
Territory, as the case may be.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued
under clause (1) any tribe or tribal community or part of or B
group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as
aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall
not be varied by any subsequent notification."

In this connection, it may also be relevant to refer to Article 341
as it deals with the Scheduled Castes:
c
"341. Scheduled Castes ( 1) The President may with
respect to any State or Union Territory, and where it is a
State after consultation 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 D
for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be
Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or Union Terri-
tory, as the case may be.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued E
under clause ( 1) any caste, race or tnbe or part of or group
within any caste, race or tribe, but save as aforesaid a
notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied
by any subsequent notification."

The question, therefore, that arises in this case, is whether the F
petitioner can claim the benefit of being a Scheduled Tribe in the State
of Maharashtra though he had, as he states, a Scheduled Tribe certifi-
cate in the State of Andhra Pradesh? lnasmuch as we are not con-
cerned in this application with the controversy as to whether the
petitioner correctly or appropriately belongs to the Gouda community
or not, or whether the petitioner had a proper certificate, it is desirable G
to confine the controversy to the basic question, namely, whether one
who is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of his origin and
birth continues to have the benefits or privileges or rights in the state
of migration or where he later goes.

In this connection, the provisions of Articles 341 and 342 of the H
848 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

Constitution have been noticed. These articles enjoin that the Presi-
A dent after consultation with the Governor where the States are
concerned, by public notification, may specify the tribes or tribal com-
munities or parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities, which
shall be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State under
Article 341 and 342 Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union
B Territory. The main question, therefore, is the specification by the
President of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes, as the case may
be, for the State or Union Territory or part of the State. But this
specification is 'for the purposes of this Constitution'. It is, therefore,
necessry, as has been canvassed, to determine what the expression 'in
relation to that state' in conjunction with 'for the purposes of this
c
Constitution' seeks to convey. r
Article 15 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on
grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Article 15(4),
however, enjoins that nothing in that article or in clause (2) of Article
29 of the Constitution shall prevent the State from making any special
o provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally back-
ward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes. Therefore, reservation in favour of Scheduled Tribes or
Scheduled Castes for the purpose of advancement of socially or educa-
tionally backward citizens to make them equal with other segments of
community in educational or job facilities is the mandate of the Con-
E stitution. Equality is the dictate of our Constitution. Article 14 ensures
equality in its fullness to all our citizens. State is enjoined not to deny to
any person equality before law and equal protection of the law within
the territory of India. Where, it is necessary, however, for the purpose
of bringing about real equality of opportunity between those who are
unequals, certain reservations are necessary and these should be
F ensured. Equality under the Constitution is a dynamic concept which
must cover every process of equalisation. Equality must become a
living reality for the large masses of the people. Those who are
unequal, in fact, cannot be treated by identical standards; that may be
equality in law but it would certainly not be real equality. Existence of
equality of opportunity depends not merely on the absence of dis-
G abilities but on presence of abilities. It is not simply a matter of legal
equality. De jure equality must ultimately find its raison d'tre in de
facto equality. The State must, therefore, resort to compensatory State
action for the purpose of making people who are factually unequal in
their wealth, education or social environment, equal in specified areas.
It is necessary to take into account de facto inequalities which exist in
H the society and to take affirmative action by way of giving preference
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE [MUKHARJI, CJ.I 849

and reservation to the socially and economically disadvantaged
A
f persons or inflicting handicaps on those more advantageously placed,
--~- - in order to bring about real equality. Such affirmative action though
apparently discriminatory is calculated to produce equality on a
broader basis by eliminating de facto inequalities and placing the
weaker sections of the community on a footing of equality with the
stronger and more powerful sections so that each member of the com- B
munity, whatever is his birth, occupation or social position may enjoy
__,..,,.-equal opportunity of using to the full his natural endowments of physi-
que, of character and of intelligence. In this connection. reference may
be made to the observations of this Court in Pradeep Jain & Ors. v.
Union of India & Ors., [1984] 3 SCC 654.
-~ It appears that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in some
c
States had to suffer the social disadvantages and did not have the
"' - facilities for development and growth. It is, therefore, necessary in
order to make them equal in those areas where they have so suffered
and are in the state of under development to have reservations or
protection in their favour so that they can compete on equal terms with D
the more advantageous or developed sections of the community.
Extreme social and economic 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
state and it will not be proper to generalise any caste or any tribe as a E
Scheduled Tribe or Scheduled Caste for the whole country. This, how-
ever, is a different problem whether a member of the Scheduled Caste
in one part of the country who migrates to another State or any other
,..._ Union Territory should continue to be treated as a Scheduled Caste or
Scheduled Tribe in which he has migrated. That question has to be
__ L.. judged taking into consideration the interest and well-being of the F
. \ Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the country as a whole.

It has, however, to be borne in mind that a man does not cease to
belong to his caste by migration to a better or more socially free and
liberal atmosphere. But if sufficiently long time is spent in socially
advanced area then the inhibitions and handicaps suffered by belong- G
ing to a socially disadvantageous community do not continue and the
natural talent of a man or a woman or a boy or girl gets full scope to
.,>-- flourish. These, however, are problems of social adjustment i.e. how
far protection has to be given to a certain segment of socially disad-
vantaged community and for how long to become equal with others is_ a
matter of delicate social ad iustment. These must be so balanced In the H
850 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

mosaic of the country's integrity that no section or community should
A cause detriment or discontentment to other community or part of com-
munity or section. Scheduled Castes arid Scheduled Tribes belonging
to a particular area of the country must be given protection so long as
and to the extent they are entitled in order to become equal with
"
-~.

others. But equally those who go to other areas should also ensure that
B they make way for the disadvantaged and disabled of that part of the
community who suffer from inabilities in those areas. In other words,
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes say of Andhra Pradesh do .,.,
require necessary protection as balanced between other communities.
But equally the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes say of
Maharashtra in the instant case, do require protection in the State of
Maharashtra, which will have to be in balance to other communities.
c This must be the basic approach to the problem. If one bears this basic
approach in mind, then the determination of the controversy in the
i
-
instant case does not become difficult. For the purpose of understand- -r
ing the problem, it may be worthwhile to refer to the Report of the
Joint Committee of the Parliament on the Scheduled Castes and
D Scheduled Tribes (Amendment) Order Bill, 1967. It may also be worth-
while to refer to the proceedings of the Constttuent Assembly on the
17th September, 1949 dealing with Articles 303 and 304, which later on
became Articles341and342 respectively. Dr. B.R. Ambedkarmoving
the Resolution observed as follows:
";
E "That after article 300, the following articles be inserted:

300A.(1) The President may, after consultation with the
Governor or Ruler of a State, by public notification specify
the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes
races or tribes, which shall for purposes of this Constitution
F be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to the State.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued by
the President under clause (1) of this article any caste, race
or tribe or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe,
G but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said
clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.

300B.(1) The President may after consultation with the
Governor or Ruler of a State, by public notification specify
the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within
H tribes or tribal communities wlllch shall for purposes of this
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE [MUKHARJI, CJ.I 851

Constitution be deemed to be scheduled tribes in relation
A
to that State.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of scheduled tribes specified in a notification issued by
the President under clause (1) of this article any Tribe or
Tribal community or part of or group within any Tribe or B
Tribal community but save as aforesaid a notification
issued under the said clause shall not be varied by any
subsequent notification.

- ·~ The object of these two articles, as I stated, was to
eliminate the necessity of burdening the Constitution with
long lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. It is
c
now proposed that the President, in consultation with the
Governor or Ruler of a State should have the power to
issue a general notification in the Gazette specifying all the
Castes and tribes or groups therof deemed to be Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of the D
privileges which have been defined for them in the Con-
stitution. The only limitation that has been imposed is this:
that once a notification has been issued by the President,
which, undoubtedly, he will be issuing in consultation with
and on the advice of the Government of each State, there-
after, if any elimination was to be made from the List so E
notified or any addition was to be made, that must be made

- by Parliament and not by the President. The object _is to
eliminate any kind of political factors having a play in the
matter of the disturbance in the Schedule so published by
the President."
F
Our" attention was also drawn to the views of Prof. K.T. Shah in
the Constituent Assembly which are as follows:

"That at the end of clause (2) of article 9, the following be
added:-
G
'or for Scheduled Castes or backward tribes, for their
advantage, safeguard or betterment' "

The clause, as it is, stands thus:

"Nothing in this article shall prevent the States from mak- H
852 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

A
ing any special provision for women and children."

Sir, it must be distinguished from the preceding article. I
read it, at any rate, that this is a provision for discrimina-
'
tion in favour of women and children, tci which I have
added the Scheduled Castes or backward tribes. This dis-
B crimination is in favour of particular classes of our society
which, owing to an unfortunate legacy of the past, suffer ''>r
from disabilities or handicaps. Those, I think, may require
special treatment; and if they do require it, they should be
permitted special facilities for some time so that real equa-
lity of citizens be established. ./ _

c The rage for equality which has led to provide equal citi-
zenship and equal rights for women has sometimes found
exception in regard to special provisions that, in the long
range, in the interest of the country or of the race, exclude
women from certain dangerous occupations, certain types
D of work. That I take it, is not intended in any way to
diminish their civic equality or status as citizens. It is only
intended to safeguard, protect or lead to their betterment
in general; so that the long-range interests of the country
may not suffer.

E' In regard to the scheduled castes and backward tribes, it is
an open secret that they have been neglected in the past;
and their rights and claims to enjoy and have the capacity
to enjoy as equal citizens happens to be denied to them
because of their backwardness. l seek therefore by this
motion to include them also within the scope of this sub-
F clause (2), so that any special discrimination in favour of
them may not be regarded as violating the basic principles
of equality for all classes of citizens in the country. They
need and must be given, for some time to come at any rate,
special treatment in regard to education, in regard to
opportunity for employment, and in many other cases
G where their present inequality, their present backwardness
is only a hindrance to the rapid development of the
country.

Any section of the community which is backward must
necessarily impede the progress of the rest; and it is only in
H the interest of the community itself, therefore, that it is but
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE (MUKHARJI, CJ.] 853

_L right and proper we should provide facilities so that they
may be brought up-to-date so to say and the. uniform pro-
gress of all be forwarded.
A

I have, of course, not included in my amendment the
length of years, the term of years for which some such
special treatment may be given. That may be determined B
by the circumstances of the day. I only want to draw your
attention to the fact that there are classes of our citizens
who may need, through no fault of theirs, some special
treatment if equality is not t'? be equality of name only or
on paper only, but equality of fact. I trust this will com-
mend itself to the House and the amendment will be
accepted." c
It is, however, necessary to give proper meaning to .the expres-
sions 'for the purposes of this Constitution' and 'in relation to that
State' appearing in Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution. The High
Court of Gujarat has taken the view in two decisions, namely, Kum. D
Manju Singh v. The Dean, B.J. Medical College, AIR 1986 Gujarat
175 and Ghanshyam Kisan Borikar v. L. D. Engineering College, AIR
1987 Gujarat 83 to which our attention was drawn, that the phrase
'for the purposes of this Constitution' cannot be and should not be
r made subservient to the phrase 'in relation to that State' and there-
fore, it was held in those two decisions that in consequence the classifi- E
cation made by one State placing a particular caste or tribe in the
category of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes would entitle a
member of that caste or tribe to all the benefits, privileges and protec-
tions under the Constitution of India. A similar view has been taken by
_J..-. the Kamataka High Court in the case of M. Muni Reddy v. Kamataka
'Public Service Commission & Ors., [1981) Lab. I.C. 1345. On the F
other hand, the Orissa High Court in the case of K. Appa Rao v.
Director of Posts & Telegraphs, Orissa & Ors., AIR 1969 Orissa 220
and the full Bench of the Bombay High Court in M.S. Malathi v. The
Commissioner, Nagpur Division & Ors., AIR 1989 Bombay 138 have
taken the view that in view of the expression 'in relation to that State'
occurring in Articles 341 and 342, the benefit of the status of G
Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes would be available only in the
' ,~- State in respect of which the Caste or Tribe is so specified. A similar
view has been taken by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case
of V.B. Singh v. State of Punjab, ILR 1976 1 Punjab & Haryana 769.

It is trite knowledge that the statutory and constitutional provi- H
854 SUPREME COURT REPORTS I1990] 2 S.C.R.
sions should be interpreted broadly and harmoniously. It is trite saying
A
that where there is conflict between two provisions, these should be so - - .._
interpreted as to give effect to both. Nothing is surplus in a Constitu-
'
tion and no part should be made nugatory. This is well-settled. See the
observations of this Court in Sri Venkataramana Devaru & Ors. v.
State of Mysore & Ors., [1958] SCR 895 at 918, where Venkatarama
B Aiyar, J. reiterated that the rule of construction is well-settled and
where there are in an enactment two provisions which cannot be ,,,_
reconciled with each other, these should be so interpreted that, if
possible, effect could be given to both. It, however, appears to us that
the expression 'for the purposes of this Constitution' in Articles 341 as
well as in Article 342 do imply that the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes so specified would be entitled to enjoy all the con-
c stitutional rights that are enjoyable by all the citizens as such. Con-
)
-
stitutional right, e.g., it has been argued that right to migration or right ..,,.
to move from one part to another is a right given to all-to scheduled
castes or tribes and to non-scheduled castes or tribes. But when a
Scheduled Caste or tribe migrates, there is no inhibition in migrating
D but when he migrates, he does not and cannot carry any special rights
or privileges attributed to him or granted to him in the original State
specified for that State or area or part thereof. If that right is not given
in the migrated state it does not interfere with his constitutional right
of equality or of migration or of carrying on his trade, business or
profession. Neither Article 14, 16, 19 nor Article 21 is denuded by '<;
E migration but he must enjoy those rights in accordance with the law if
they are otherwise followed in the place where he migrates. There
should be harmonious construction, harmonious in the sense that both
parts or all parts of a constitutional provision should be so read that r
one part does not become nugatory to the other or denuded to the
other but all parts must be read in the context in which these are used .. ~~
F It was contended that the only way in which the fundamental rights of
the petitioner under Article 14, 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e) and 19(1)(f) couid ,l
be given effect to is by construing Article 342 in a manner by which a
member of a Scheduled Tribe gets the benefit of that status for the
purposes of the Constitution throughout the territory of India. It was
submitted that the words "for the purposes of this Constitution" must
G be given full effect. There is no dispute .about that. The words "for the
purposes of this Constitution" must mean that a Scheduled Caste so
designated must have right under Articles 14, 19(l)(d), 19(1)(e) and .,J
19(1)(f) inasmuch as these are applicable to him in his area where he
migrates or where he goes. The expression "in relation to that State"
'
would become nugatory if in all States the special privileges or the
H rights granted to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes are carried
,.

M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE [MUKHARJI, Cl.] 855

forward. It will also be inconsistent with the whole purpose of the
A
__}_ scheme of reservation. In Andhra Pradesh, a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe may require protection because a boy or a child who
grows in that area is inhibited or is at disadvantage. In Maharashtra
that caste or that tribe may not be so inhibited but other castes or
tribes might be. If a boy or a child goes to that atmosphere of
Maharashtra as a young boy or a child and goes in a completely diffe- B
rent atmosphere or Maharashtra where this inhibition or this disad-
vantage is not there, then he cannot be said to have that reservation
which will denude the children or the people of Maharashtra belonging
to any segment of that State who may still require tliat protection.

- ~
After all, it has to be borne in mind that the protection is necessary for
the disadvantaged castes or tribes of Maharashtra as well as disad-
vantaged castes or tribes of Andhra Pradesh. Thus, balancing must be
c
done as between those who need protection and those who need no
protection, i.e., who belong to advantaged castes or tribes and who do
not. Treating the determination under Articles 341 and 342 of the
Constitution to be valid for all over the country would be in negation
to the very purpose and scheme and language of Articles 341 read with D
Article 15(4) of the Constitution. ·
Our attention was drawn to certain observations in Elizabeth
Warburton v. James Loveland, [1832] House of Lords 499. It is true
that all provisions should be read harmoniously. It is also true that no
provision should be so read as to make other provisions nugatory or
restricted. But having regard to the purpose, it appears to us that E.
harmonious construction enjoins that we should give to each expres-
sion- 'in relation to that state' or "for the purposes of this Constitu-
tion"-its full meaning and give their full effect. 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
F
State is so determined to be entitled 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 Con-
stitution. Otherwise, one has to bear in mind that if reservations to
those who are treated as Scheduled Caste or Tribe in Andhra Pradesh
are also given to a boy or a girl who migrates and gets deducted in the
State of Maharashtra or other States where that caste or tribe is not G
t•eated as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe then either reservation
will have the effect of depriving the percentage to the 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
H
cannot be logical or correct result designed by the Constitution.
856 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

In the case of Pradeep Jain v. Union of India, (supra), this Court
A held that a wholesale reservation of seats on the basis of residence
requirement within the State or institutional preference would be
violative of Article 14. Equally it is argued that a construction of
'
- >....___

Article 342 which completely prevents a Scheduled Tribe candidate of
Andhra Pradesh from getting a medical seat in Maharashtra under the
B Schedule Tribe quota would be violative of Article 14. It would not be
so, because a Scheduled Tribe candidate of Andhra Pradesh will be
\-
entitled to all the benefits in medical colleges of the State· of
Maharashtra. It was argued that under articles 19(1)(d), (e) and (f), if
a parent wishes to keep his child with him, the opposite view would
necessarily mean that he must remain confined to his home State,
disregarding ·an suitable job opportunities commensurate with his J -
c education, experience and talent. We are unable to accept this submis-
sion. These are not additional protection, i.e., he can only enjoy the
protection of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe but he cannot
en joy the protection of non-Scheduled Tribes or Castes in addition to
the existing fundamental rights.
D
It is further submitted that the view canvassed on behalf of the
petitioner finds support in Durga Das Basu's Commentary on the Con-
stitution of India, 6th Edition, Vol. N-page 149, where it is stated as
follows:

E "'In relation to that State'. I. A caste which is specified as a
Scheduled Caste in a particular State may not deserve to be
so specified in another State. But when a caste is specified
in the President's Order in relation to a particular State, it
does not mean that a person belonging to that caste should
be considered to be the member of a S.C. only for that
F State alone. Once a caste is included in the Scheduled
Castes Order, that would be for purposes of the
Constitution.''

It was submitted on the basis of the decision of this Court in
Pradeep Jain's case (supra) that the residence requirement of 15 years
G in order to be eligible for admission to medical colleges in Maharashtra
is wholly arbitrary, unreasonable and hence violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution. Our attention was drawn to the decisions of this Court
in D.P. Joshi v. The State of Madhya Bharat & Anr., [1955] 1 SCR
1215 and Minor P. Rajendra v. State of Madras & Ors., [1968] 2 SCR
786 on the question of residence qualification. In the view we !:ave
H taken and in the context of the controversy in the instant case, we are
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE IMUKHARJI, CJ.] 857

r
_J __
of the opinion that this question will not be relevant. A

We have heard learned Attorney General of India and he has
drawn our attention to the policy followed by the Government of India
for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The policy seems to be
as under:
B
"I. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are entitled to
derive benefits of the All India Services or admissions in the
educational institutions controlled/administered by the
Central Government, irrespective of the State to which
they belong. The reservation in force in favour of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in filling vacancies C
in posts and services under the Government of India are as
in the enclosure (Chapter II of the Brochure on the .Reser-
vation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in
Services issued by the Government of India). The reserva-
tions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the All
D
India Services are covered by these provisions and at pre-
sent are 15% and 7.5% respectively. The Central Govern-
ment/Government services include the All India Services
i.e. the Indian Administrative Service, the Indian Police
Service, the Forest Service, etc.
y
E
II. The direct recruitment in respect of the All India
Services is made on all India basis and the Scheduled Caste
and Scheduled Tribe Candidates recruited at the indicated
percentages of 15 and 7 .5 respectively, are allotted to the
States. The quota or the number of officers to be allotted to
each State is decided in advance, taking into consideration
F
the cadre gap and the impending retirement in the direct
recruitment quota. For example, if a State has 12 direct
vacancies, 22.5% of that would be 2.70. In that case, 2.70
would be rounded off to 3 and to that State cadre 3 officers
belonging to the reserved category would be allotted."
G
This, however, does not affect the present controversy. We also
had the advantage of hearing the Advocate General of Maharashtra-
•- Mr. A.S. Bobde. Mr. Raju Ramachandran learned advocate for the
petitioner urged before us to take holistic view of the Constitution.
Indeed, he is right that a holistic approach to the different provisions
of the Constitution should be taken. H
858 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990) 2 S.C.R.

A Having regard, however, to the purpose and the scheme of the
Constitution which would be just and fair to the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes, not only of one State of origin but other states also
where the Scheduled Castes or tribes migrate in consonance with the
rights of other castes or community, rights should be harmoniously
balanced. Reservations should and must be adopted to advance the
B prospects of weaker sections of society, but while doing so care should
be taken not to exclude the legitimate expectations of the other seg-
. ments of the community.

We have reached the aforesaid conclusion on the interpretation
of the relevant provisions. In this connection, it may not be
C inappropriate to refer to the views of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar as to the
prospects of the problem that might arise, who stated in the Con-
J
-
stituent Assembly Debates in reply to the question which was raised by
Mr. Jai Pal Singh ("Safeguards for Scheduled Caste and Tribes-
Founding Father's view" by H.S. Saksena, at p. 60) which are to the
following effect:
D
"He asked me another question and it was this. Supposing
a member of a scheduled tribe living in a tribal area
migrates to another part of the territory of India, which is
outside both the scheduled area and the tribal area, will he
be able to claim from the local government, within whose
E jurisdiction be may be residing, the same privileges which
he would be entitled to when be is residing within the
scheduled area or within the tribal area? It iS a difficult

F
question for me to answer. If that matter iS agitated in
quarters where a dec1s10n on a matter like this would lie,
we would certainly be able to gtve some answer to the
question· in the form of some clause in tbis Constitution.
-
Btlt, so far as the present Constitution stands, a member.of
a scheduled tribe going outside the scheduled area or tribal
area would certainly not be entitled to carry with him the
privileges that he is entitled to when he is residing in a
scheduled area or a tribal area. So far as 1 can see; it will be
G practically impossible to enforce the provisions that apply
to tribal areas or scheduled areas, in areas other than those
which are covered by them ..... ;,

In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the
petitioner is not entitled to be admitted to the medical .GOllege on the
H basis of Scheduled Tribe Certificate in Maharashtra. hi the view we
M.C.S. RAO v. G.S. MEDICAL COLLEGE [MUKHARJI, CJ.] 859

have taken, the question of petitioner's right to be admitted as being
A'
domicile does not fall for consideration.

Having construed the provisions of Article 341 and 342 of the
Constitution in the maner we have done, the next question that falls
for consideration, is, the question of. the fate of those scheduled caste
and scheduled tribe stuoents who get the protection of being classed as B
scheduled caste or scheduled tribes in the States of origin when,
because of transfer or movement of their father or guardian's business
or service, they move to other States as a matter of voluntary transfer,
will they be entitled to some sort of protective treatment so that they
may cont\nue or pursue their education. Having considered the facts
and circumstances of such situation, it appears to us that where the
migration from one State to other is involuntary, by force of circum- c
stances either of employment or of profession, in such cases if students
. -y-
or persons apply in the migrated State where without affecting prejudi-
cially the rights of the scheduled castes or scheduled tribes in those
States or areas, any facility or protection for continuance of study or
admission can be given to one who has so migrated then some consi- D
deration is desirable to be made on that ground. It would, therefore,
be necessary and perhaps desirable for the legislatures or the Parlia-
ment to consider appropriate legislations bearing this aspect in mind so
that proper effect is given to the rights given to scheduled castes and
r scheduled tribes by virtue of the provisions under Articles 341 and 342
of the Constitution. This is a matter which the State legislatures or the E
Parliament may appropriately take into consideration.

Having so held, now the question is, as to what is to happen to
the petitioner in this case. As we have held, the petitioner is not
entitled to be admitted to the Medical College on the basis that he
belongs to scheduled tribe in his original State. The petitioner has, F
however, been admitted. He has progressed in his studies. But he had
given an undertaking that he will not insist on the basis of the admis-
sion. If we allow him to continue with his studies in Maharashtra's
College where he has been admitted on the undertaking given after he
has not succeeded in this application, it would be.a bad precedent. We
must, however, do justice. The boy's educational prospects should not G
be jeopardised since he has progressed to a certain extent and disqua-
';.-.. lifying him at this stage or this year on the ground that he is not
entitled to the protection of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe,
would not confer any commensurate benefit to scheduled castes or
scheduled tribes in Maharashtra or for that matter on anybody else. It
is, therefore, desirable that the question whether he is genuinely H
860 SUPREME COURT REPORTS I !990] 2 S.C.R.

A belonging to Gouda community and whether this community is a
scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, should be first properly and
appropriately determined. As mentioned hereinbefore, we have not
examined this qustion. After determining that whether after making
provisions for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes of Maharash-
tra, if any facility of admission or continuance of study can be given in
B the Medical College in Maharashtra to the petitioner herein. the
authorities incharge of the Institution should consider the same and if
on that considering they find it justified in allowing the petitioner to
continue in his studies, they may do so. The authorities should con-
sider the same and take action accordingly, as expeditiously as possi-
ble. In considering the question of the petitioner continuing his medi-
c cal education, the appropriate authorities should bear in mind the
justice of the situation." We, therefore, leave it to the authorities to
take appropriate action about the continuance or discontinuance of
the petitioner in his studies on the basis of the aforesaid consideration.
We order accordingly. We do so only in the background of the peculiar
facts and circumstances of this case. and the aforesaid observations
D should not be treated as a precedent for other situations.

We, therefore, direct that the petitioner is not entitled to be
admitted to the Medical College on the basis that he belonged to the
scheduled tribes in Andhra Pradesh but his continuance in the College
will depend upoQ the consideration indicated hereinbefore. The writ
E petition is thus disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

R.N.J. Petition disposed of.