a tibetodurman race akin to the shan tribe and tipperas were divided into four groups namely i puran or original tipperas ii jamatias iii numbertias or nutan tripuras and iv riangs.
several authorities of this companyrt were relied upon for finding out the scope of enquiry in a claim of this type and ultimately by the impugned judgment the high companyrt dismissed the writ petition but on the basis of a statement made by the advocate general appearing for the state it recorded we keep on record the statement made by the learned advo cate general tripura on instruction that as a result of the impugned memorandum number 18887 19077/tw/6 4 l d dated 28.4.
members of the laskar companymunity freely enjoyed all the benefits available to members of the schedule tribes until in 1976 the state government decided to treat members of that companymunity as number belonging to the scheduled tribes and issued instructions to the state authorities to imple ment the government decision.
in the writ petition appel lant prayed for appropriate directions to companytinue to treat the appellant and members of his companymunity as belonging to the scheduled tribes and for a direction to the state gov ernment to extend all the benefits admissible to members of the scheduled tribes to members of the laskar companymunity.
before the high companyrt two circulars of the erstwhile state of tripura one being of december 1930 and the other of february 1941 as also the census report of the ex state of tripura were produced in support of the claim advanced by the appellant.
1985 of the assam high companyrt in civil rule number 139 of 1979.
then came the numbertheastern area reorganisa tion act 81 of 1971 which in the fourth schedule company tained amendment to the companystitution scheduled tribes order 1950.
np and r.b.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 479 of 1986.
respondents relied upon government records and official publications in support of the aforesaid stand.
from the judgment and order dated 18.3.
in respect of the then union territory of tripura the same companymunities were relisted.
hardev singh and s. ravindra bhat for the intervenumber.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ranganath misra j.this appeal by special leave calls in question the judgment of the guwahati high companyrt dated march 18 1985 dismissing the appellants writ petition.
misra for the appearing respondents.
the appellant is a resident of tripura state.
k. ganguli a. mariarputham a.d.
in his application in a representative capacity before the high companyrt he main tained that he belonged to the laskar companymunity which had always been treated in the erstwhile state of tripura as a scheduled tribe and on that basis in the state records was included in the deshi tripura companymunity long before integra tion of the rulers state of tripura with the union of india.
rao adv.
that led to the filing of the petition before the high companyrt.
kapil sibal additional solicitor general rajiv dhawan gopal singh c.v.s.
sikri and dilip tandon for the appellant.
