Bharat Express

Manipur High Court Removes Order to Include Meiteis in Scheduled Tribe List

The reason for the removal of this paragraph was clarified by a bench of Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu, who observed that the paragraph in question had been included in the original judgment based on a ‘misconception of the law’.

In a significant development, the Manipur High Court amended its March 27, 2023 order by deleting a specific paragraph. This paragraph, known as Paragraph 17(iii) of the judgment, had recommended the state government to consider including the majority Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) list. The proposal had faced opposition from the tribal Kukis, and the initial high court order was believed to have triggered ethnic clashes that began in May and are ongoing, resulting in numerous casualties.

Manipur High Court

The paragraph removed from the order was Paragraph 17(iii), which stated:

“The first respondent shall consider the case of petitioners for inclusion of the Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in terms of the averments set out in the writ petition and in the line of the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 4281 of 2002 dated 26.05.2003 by the Gauhati High Court.”

Also read: Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman Applauds UP CM Yogi Adityanath’s Dynamic Leadership

The reason for the removal of this paragraph was clarified by a bench of Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu, who observed that the paragraph in question had been included in the original judgment based on a ‘misconception of the law’. The petitioners, it was noted, had failed to properly assist the court during the hearing of the writ petition, which led to this misconception of fact and law. Justice Gaiphulshillu further pointed out that the March 2023 order was ‘contrary’ to a Supreme Court judgment in the case of State of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors, wherein the apex court ruled that courts do not have the authority to ‘modify, amend, or alter the ST list.’

In light of these considerations, the Manipur HC bench ruled that the direction given in Paragraph 17(iii) needed to be deleted and consequently ordered its removal.