Supreme Court of India
SAKTIversusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.
- Citation
- 2009 INSC 601
- Decided
- 24 April 2009
- Disposal
- Disposed off
- Bench
- ARIJIT PASAYAT
Holding
The two Acts operate in different fields, and the State Government must appoint officers as mandated by Section 21(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Summary
The petitioner, SAKTI, filed a writ petition seeking the appointment of an officer under Section 21 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to initiate prosecutions and ensure safety for Scheduled Tribes in several mandals of West Godavari district. The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the functions of the State Commission under Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2003 were sufficient and that the petitioner could approach the Commission for relief. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the State Act could substitute for the Central Act’s provision for appointing officers. The Court held that the two statutes operate in distinct fields; Section 21 of the Central Act imposes a duty on the State Government to take measures, including appointing officers, for effective implementation of the Act. Consequently, the Court directed the State Government to appoint the required officer within six months, setting aside the High Court’s dismissal.
Issues considered
- Whether Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh State Commission Act, 2003 can replace the requirement of appointing officers under Section 21 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
- Whether the State Government is obligated under Section 21 of the Central Act to appoint officers for initiating and supervising prosecutions.
- Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that the State Commission’s functions were comprehensive.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Scheduled CastesScheduled TribesPrevention of Atrocities Actappointment of officersstate dutywrit petitionimplementation of law
Judgment
[2009] 6 S.C.R. 1024
y
A SAKTI
v.
STATE OF A.P. & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2805 of 2000)
APRIL 24, 2009
8
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR
GANGULY, JJ.]
Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Scheduled
c Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2003 - s. 12 - Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 - s.21 - Writ petition praying for appointment of Officer
for initiating prosecution for contravention of provisions of
1989 Act- Dismissed by High Court - On appeal, held: The
two Acts operate in flt10 different fields - So far as s.21 of the ~
....
D
Central Act is concerned, it is the duty of the State
Government to take such measure as may be necessary for
effective implementation of the Act and that includes the
appointment of the officers in initiating or exercising for
E supervision over prosecutions for the contravention of the
provisions of the Act - State Government to take immediate
steps for appointment in terms of s.21(2) of the Central Act.
l •
The appellant filed a writ petition praying for
appointment of an Officer, inspiring confidence in
F accordance with Section 21 of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(Central Act) for initiating prosecution for contravention
of the provisions of the 1989 Act and for ensuring safety
to the S.Ts residing in Jeelugumilli, Buttaryagudem, ~
G Polavaram, T. Narasapuram and Gopalapuram Mandals ~
of West Godavari District.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding
that the provisions of the A.P. State Commission for
H 1024
SAKTI v. STATE OF AP. & ORS. 1025
~
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2003 (State A
• Act) and the notification issued thereunder on 7.11.2003
constituting a Commission is to discharge such
functions as are envisaged under Section 12 of the 2003
Act which are comprehensively enough and that the
appellant can approach the Commission for redressal of B
its grievances.
In appeal to this Court, the appellant contended that
the State and the Central Act operate in different fields
and, therefore, one cannot be a substitute for the other.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
c
HELD: A bare perusal of the two provisions i.e.
Section 12 of the A.P. State Commission for Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2003 and Section 21
.., of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes D
/>
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 leaves no manner of
doubt that they operate in two different fields. So far as
Section 21 of the Central Act is concerned, it is the duty
of the State Government to take such measure as may
be necessary for effective implementation of the Act and E
that includes the appointment of the officers in initiating
or exercising for supervision over prosecutions for the
contravention of the provisions of the Act. Section 12(b)
> "' of the State Act relates to investigation and monitoring
of all matters relating to safeguards provided for the F
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the
Constitution or under any other law for the time being in
force or under any order of the Government and to
evaluate the working of such safeguards. The State
Government is directed to take immediate steps for
- j appointment in terms of Section 21(2) of the Central Act.
G
····~[Paras 7 and 9] [1029-A-D]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
2805 of 2009.
From the Judgment & Order dated 08.11.2004 of the High H
1026 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 6 S.C.R.
'r'
A Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No.
11543 of 1999.
R. Venkataramani, Satya Mitra Garg Alzo for the
Appellants.
-
B A.G. Chaudhary, Manoj Saxena, R. Kr. Singh, Rahul
Shukla and T.V. George for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted.
c 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a
Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing
the writ petition filed by the appellant. Prayer in the writ petition
was as follows:
(1) to appoint an Officer, inspiring confidence in
D accordance with Section 21 of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
~ -
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Act') for initiating
prosecution for contravention of the provisions of the
Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
E Atrocities) Act, 1989 and for ensuring safety to the S.Ts
residing in Jeelugumilli, Buttaryagudem, Polavaram, T.
Narasapuram and Gopalapuram Mandals of West
Godavari District. '1 ~
(2) to provide adequate legal aid to the persons subjected
F to atrocities, to enable them to avail justice and
consequently declare that the peaceful agitation and
awakening campaign of the petitioner organization and
followed by S.Ts. for restoration of lands belonging to S.Ts
in the furtherance of the prevention of atrocities under S.C.
G & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. ~
~
3. The High Court held that the provisions of the A.P. State
Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act,
2003 (Act No.9 of 2003) (hereinafter referred to as the 'State
Act') and the notification issued thereunder on 7.11.2003
H
SAKTI v. STATE OF A.P. & ORS. 1027
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
constituting a Commission is to discharge such functions as A
are envisaged under Section 12 of the Act which are
comprehensively enough. Therefore, it was observed that the
appellant can approach the Commission for redressal of its
grievances.
B
4. Stand of the learned counsel for the appellant in essence
is that the State and the Central Act operate in different fields
and, therefore, one cannot be a substitute for the other. Learned
counsel for the respondent submitted that some amount of
overlapping is there and, therefore, there cannot be any doubt C
about the adequacy.
5.1 n the State Act Section 12 reads as follows:
"12. Functions of the Commission :- The Commission
shall perform the following functions, namely:- D
xxx )()()( )()()(
(b) to investigate and monitor all matters relating to the
safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes and
S~heduledTribes under the Constitution or under any other E
law for the time being in force or under any order of the
Government and to evaluate the working of such
safeguards.
6. So far as Central Act is concerned, Section 21 reads
F
as follows:
"21. Duty of Government to ensure effective implementation
of the Act - (1) Subject to such rules as the Central
Government may make in this behalf, the State
Go'{ernment shall take such measures as may be G
necessary for the effective implementation of this Act.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of
the foregoing provisions, such measure may include, -
H
1028 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R.
A (i) the provision for adequate facilities, including
legal aid, to the persons subjected to atrocities to
enable them to avail themselves of justice;
(ii) the provision for travelling and maintenance
expenses to witnesses, including the victims of
B
atrocities, during investigation and trial of offences
under this Act;
(iii) the provision for the economic and social
rehabilitation of the victims of the atrocities;
c
(iv) the appointment of officers for initiating or
exercising supervision over prosecutions for the
contravention of the provisions of this Act;
(v) the setting up of committees at such appropriate ,..
D levels as the State Government may thin~ fit to +
assist that Government in formulation or
implementation, of such measures;
(vi) provision for a periodic survey of the working
E of the provisions of this Act with a view to
suggesting measures for the better implementation
of the provisions of this Act;
~ ~
(vii) the identification of the areas where the ~
members of the Scheduled Castes and the
F
Scheduled Tribes are likely to be subjected to
atrocities and adoption of such measures so as to
ensure safety for such members.
(3) The Central Government shall take such steps as may
;-
G be necessary to co-ordinate the measures taken by the ~
,,.
State Governments under sub-section (1)
(4) The Central Government shall, every year, place on the
table of each House of Parliament a report on the
H measures taken by itself and by the State Governments
SAKTI v. STATE OF A.P. & ORS. 1029
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
in pursuance of the provisions of this section." A
7. A bare perusal of the two provisions i.e. Section 12 of
i the State Act and Section 21 of the Central Act leaves no
manner of doubt that they operate in two different fields. So far
as Section 21 of the Central Act is concerned, it is the duty of 8
the State Government to take such measure as may be
necessary for effective implementation of the Act and that
includes the appointment of the officers in initiating or
exercising for supervision over, prosecutions for the
contravention of the provisions of the Act.
c
8. Section 12(b) of the State Act relates to investigation
and monitoring of all matters relating to safeguards provided
for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the
Constitution or under any other law for the time being in force
or under any order of the Government and to evaluate the D
·~ working of such safeguards.
9. Above being the position, we direct the State
Government to take immediate steps for appointment in terms
of Section 21 (2) of the Central Act as early as practicable E
preferably within six months from today.
10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
D.G. Appeal disposed of.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Scheduled Castes"Sign in to search