Who Really Holds the Power to Add or Remove a Tribe From the Scheduled Tribes List in India

Few questions in Indian reservation law arise as frequently — and are answered as firmly — as this one: is it open to State Governments, courts, tribunals, or any other authority to modify, amend, or alter the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification issued under Clause (1) of Article 342? The answer, settled by a long line of judicial decisions, is a clear no. The power to include or exclude any tribe, tribal community, or part thereof from that list rests exclusively with Parliament, acting by law.

The Constitutional Framework of Article 342

Article 342(1) empowers the President to specify, after consultation with the Governor, the tribes or tribal communities deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or Union Territory. The resulting Presidential notification — most notably the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 — becomes the sole authoritative text for determining who qualifies as a Scheduled Tribe.

Article 342(2) then completes the scheme: any inclusion or exclusion from that list can happen only by an Act of Parliament. As one Division Bench decision squarely put it, a notification issued under Clause (1) of Article 342 can be amended only by law to be made by the Parliament 2018 0 Supreme(SC) 949. The same principle applies symmetrically to the Scheduled Castes list under Article 341

DR. B.R. AMBEDKER GRANTHALAYA EVM JAN KALYAN vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Why State Governments Cannot Act on Their Own

State Governments sometimes face pressure to recognize communities they believe deserve Scheduled Tribe benefits. But courts have repeatedly held that no State Government possesses any power to declare a particular tribe as a Scheduled Tribe 2010 0 Supreme(All) 467. In one case involving admission to a B.T.C. course, the State Government had directed authorities to treat the Bhar community — which appeared in a list of denotified tribes — as Scheduled Tribe candidates. The court set aside that direction, holding that no authority other than Parliament can amend the Presidential Order. If a State is satisfied that a tribe should be included, the permissible route is to conduct an enquiry, forward its recommendations, and have legislation introduced in Parliament 2010 0 Supreme(All) 467.

Similarly, administrative circulars or resolutions issued by State authorities cannot confer Scheduled Tribe status on a community. In a Chhattisgarh matter, a circular treating a community as part of the Nagesia Scheduled Tribe was held to be beyond jurisdiction, and consequential revenue orders based on it were quashed as having no sanctity of law 2014 0 Supreme(Chh) 91.

The Limits on Courts and Tribunals

The judiciary's role is equally constrained. Courts cannot:

• Conduct enquiries or admit evidence to declare that a community falls within a general name where it is not specifically mentioned in the relevant entry 2000 8 Supreme 429
• Substitute, add to, or declare synonyms for the tribes listed in the Presidential Order 2007 1 Supreme 820
• Accept arguments that community B is really part of listed community A and should therefore be deemed a Scheduled Tribe 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 615

As one judgment summarized, It is not possible to say that State Governments or any other authority or courts or Tribunals are vested with any power to modify or vary the said Orders 2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 141. This principle was decisively applied when the Supreme Court reversed a Bombay High Court ruling that had treated Halba-Koshti as part of the designated Scheduled Tribe Halba-Halbi 2017 0 Supreme(SC) 625. Earlier Division Bench decisions in Bhaiya Ram Munda v. Anirudh Patar and Dina v. Narain Singh, which had suggested that inquiries and evidence were permissible within limits, were held not to lay down the law correctly 2016 0 Supreme(Bom) 1841.

The Presidential Order Must Be Read As It Is

Because the list is exhaustive and final, courts apply a straightforward interpretive rule: the Scheduled Tribes Order must be read as it stands, and its entries must be given their ordinary meaning 2004 0 Supreme(Bom) 1296. This has practical consequences for caste scrutiny committees charged with verifying tribe claims.

In the Thakar tribe litigation in Maharashtra, a Scrutiny Committee rejected nearly 200 applications on the assumption that Thakars of erstwhile Ratnagiri District were different from the Thakar tribe in Entry 44 of the Order. The court rejected this approach, holding that the Entry notified Thakars without any area restriction throughout Maharashtra, and that the Committee had no competence to go behind the Order by invoking socio-cultural traits and ethnical linkage tests 2004 0 Supreme(Bom) 1296.

This also means that synonymy arguments are generally futile. A community that is synonymous with, or a subgroup of, a listed tribe cannot claim inclusion unless it is specifically named — the legal fiction created by the Presidential Order is final 2000 8 Supreme 429.

State-Specific Recognition and Migration

Another dimension reinforces the exclusivity principle: Scheduled Tribe status is state-specific. Recognition as a Scheduled Tribe in relation to a particular State is tied to the social, economic, and educational backwardness faced by the community in that home State. A person who migrates from one State to another does not carry their tribal status into the new State, even where the same community is listed in both 2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 141. The same logic explains why a caste may be classified as an OBC in one State but not in another 2011 0 Supreme(Guj) 623.

The Correct Path for Inclusion

Communities seeking Scheduled Tribe status are not without remedy — but the route is legislative, not judicial or administrative:

1. The State Government may conduct an enquiry into the community's status.
2. It may forward recommendations to the Union Government.
3. Parliament alone may amend the Presidential Order by enacting a law under Article 34(2) 2010 0 Supreme(All) 467 and 2018 0 Supreme(SC) 949.

Any shortcut — a State circular, a tribunal's finding, or a court's synonymy ruling — is constitutionally impermissible and liable to be struck down as beyond jurisdiction.

Key Takeaways

• The Presidential Order under Article 342(1) is the exclusive and final authority on who is a Scheduled Tribe.
• Only Parliament, by law, may include or exclude any tribe or group within a tribe from the list 2018 0 Supreme(SC) 949.
• Courts cannot hold inquiries, admit evidence, or recognize synonyms to expand the list 2000 8 Supreme 429 and 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 615.
• Scrutiny committees must apply the Order's entries as written, without ethnographic tinkering 2004 0 Supreme(Bom) 1296.
• State Governments may only recommend changes; they cannot themselves declare a community a Scheduled Tribe 2010 0 Supreme(All) 467.

The overall position is that the Scheduled Tribes list is a constitutional instrument, and the Constitution permits exactly one hand to touch it: Parliament's. Readers facing a specific tribe-claim dispute should note that this discussion is general information, and the application of these principles can vary with the facts of each case.