Tweet
UPA plays caste, quota cards to woo STs in UP
With the caste and reservation card out in the run up to elections in Uttar Pradesh, the UPA Government on Tuesday found the perfect opportunity to espouse the cause of Scheduled Tribe voters in the State by supporting their demand for a proportional representation in the Legislative Assembly.
The demand raised before the Supreme Court by a group of 10 castes, recently shifted from the Scheduled Castes to the Scheduled Tribes category by a Presidential Order of 2003, comes just ahead of the start of seven-phased elections in the State from February 4.
Supporting their cause, the Centre fielded Attorney General GE Vahanvati who said that the groups, comprising almost 5,57,302 voters in the State, should not be denied their constitutional right.
Vahanvati said, “Election process in the State will not be affected as the figures are available with the Census authorities. Only three to four seats will be reserved for Scheduled Tribes in the State.”
But a Bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and SS Nijjar shared the apprehension of its decision affecting the election process already underway. It said, “There has to be a fresh notification as regards those constituencies… It is bound to throw the election out of gear.” It directed its query to the counsel for Election Commission and deferred the matter till next week.
The bench also criticised the timing of the petition as six years had elapsed since the decision was taken to include them under STs.
Replying to the Bench, advocate Meenakshi Arora said, “In the past there has been only one precedent in 1971 when Parliament instructed addition of certain Scheduled Castes. On its own, the Commission cannot provide reservation of constituencies. It is not a simple task as it needs translation of figures available with Census agency into electors.”
Contrary to A-G’s suggestion dismissing the “apprehension”, the EC adopted a cautious approach and sought time to seek instructions on whether the entire process of issuing notification can be completed before the start of elections.
The petitioners, represented by senior advocate PS Narasimha, argued that the poll panel having gone by the 2001 Census never had the occasion to consider the Presidential order of 2003. It was the duty of the EC to make appropriate amends once the addition of 10 castes predominantly Gond and Kharwar were subsequently made.
The Bench directed the petitioners to serve the petition on Uttar Pradesh Government to know its views on the matter by the next date of hearing.
With the caste and reservation card out in the run up to elections in Uttar Pradesh, the UPA Government on Tuesday found the perfect opportunity to espouse the cause of Scheduled Tribe voters in the State by supporting their demand for a proportional representation in the Legislative Assembly.
The demand raised before the Supreme Court by a group of 10 castes, recently shifted from the Scheduled Castes to the Scheduled Tribes category by a Presidential Order of 2003, comes just ahead of the start of seven-phased elections in the State from February 4.
Supporting their cause, the Centre fielded Attorney General GE Vahanvati who said that the groups, comprising almost 5,57,302 voters in the State, should not be denied their constitutional right.
Vahanvati said, “Election process in the State will not be affected as the figures are available with the Census authorities. Only three to four seats will be reserved for Scheduled Tribes in the State.”
But a Bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and SS Nijjar shared the apprehension of its decision affecting the election process already underway. It said, “There has to be a fresh notification as regards those constituencies… It is bound to throw the election out of gear.” It directed its query to the counsel for Election Commission and deferred the matter till next week.
The bench also criticised the timing of the petition as six years had elapsed since the decision was taken to include them under STs.
Replying to the Bench, advocate Meenakshi Arora said, “In the past there has been only one precedent in 1971 when Parliament instructed addition of certain Scheduled Castes. On its own, the Commission cannot provide reservation of constituencies. It is not a simple task as it needs translation of figures available with Census agency into electors.”
Contrary to A-G’s suggestion dismissing the “apprehension”, the EC adopted a cautious approach and sought time to seek instructions on whether the entire process of issuing notification can be completed before the start of elections.
The petitioners, represented by senior advocate PS Narasimha, argued that the poll panel having gone by the 2001 Census never had the occasion to consider the Presidential order of 2003. It was the duty of the EC to make appropriate amends once the addition of 10 castes predominantly Gond and Kharwar were subsequently made.
The Bench directed the petitioners to serve the petition on Uttar Pradesh Government to know its views on the matter by the next date of hearing.
