SC/ST person from one State cannot claim SC/ST benefits in another State: Supreme Court

In Bhadar Ram vs Jassa Ram  the Supreme Court ruled that a person declared as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in one state cannot claim benefit of his status for employment, education or land allotment in any other state on migration.

A bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice A.S. Bopanna said: "A person belonging to Scheduled Caste /Scheduled Tribe in relation to his original state of which he is permanent or an ordinarily resident cannot be deemed to be so in relation to any other state on his migration to that state for the purpose of employment, education etc."

The Division Bench relied upon the decision of Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another v. Union of India and Another.

In Action Committee, the question that arose for consideration was whether a person belonging to caste or tribe specified for the purpose of Constitution to be Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in relation to State A migrates to State B, where a caste or tribe with the same nomenclature is specified for the purposes of Constitution to be a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in relation to that State B, will that person be entitled to claim the privileges and benefits admissible to persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and /or Scheduled Tribe in State B? 

While answering the said question, it was held that a person belonging to Scheduled Caste /Scheduled Tribe in relation to his original State of which he is permanent or an ordinarily resident cannot be deemed to be so in relation to any other State on his migration to that State for the purpose of employment, education etc.

Appellant submitted that the Action Committee decision will not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand as in that case, the court was considering the issue with respect to employment, and education and in the present case, dispute is with respect to sale of property has no substance and cannot be accepted. 

Apex Court held that "we see no reason to restrict the applicability of the decision of this court in the case of 'Action Committee' only with respect to employment, education or the like and not to make applicable the same with respect to purchase and sale of the property".