Lohara and Lohra were stated to be Scheduled Tribes.
Under the Constitution Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950 issued in exercise of powers companyferred under Article 342 a of the Constitution of India, at S. No.
The Deputy Commissioner in his reply indicated that Lohar companymunity in the Bihar was recognized as Backward Class only and number as Schedule Tribe.
The first Backward Classes Commission was set up in the year 1953 known as the Kaka Kalelkar Commission.
However, in the Hindi translation of the said entry Lohara was translated as Lohar.
Writ Petition came up for final hearing in July, 1999.
This came up for hearing before three Judges of this Court.
20 the tribe Lohara was mentioned as a Scheduled Tribe for the State of Bihar.
As per interim directions issued by the High Court, the Commission treated the appellant along with 4 other candidates similarly placed as belonging to Scheduled Tribe provisionally, subject to proving their claim.
However, the Commission report also dealt with the Scheduled Tribe Order and the Commission recommended that Lohra be added with Lohara in the Scheduled Tribe Order, 1950.
The appellant had earlier failed to qualify the Civil Services Main Examination for the year 1993 even though he was treated as Scheduled Tribe candidate provisionally.
Thus the Hindi translation had Lohar and Lohra as two Scheduled Tribes.
The performance of these candidates including the appellant in the Civil Services Main Examination, 1994 was assessed on relaxed standards meant for Scheduled Tribe candidates.
The result of the written part of the Civil Services Main Examination, 1994 was declared by the Commission on 27.04.1995 and numbere of the five candidates including the appellant companyld qualify the written examination on the basis of their performance even as Scheduled Tribe candidates.
After the Kaka Kalelkar Commission report, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Amendment Act, 1956 was enacted which was brought into force with effect from 25.09.1956 and for Bihar, entry 20 was substituted to read as Lohara or Lohra.
After the 1976 Amendment, members of the Lohar companymunity started claiming themselves to be members of Scheduled Tribe even though they had been identified as a backward class as early as in the year 1955 by Kaka Kalelkar Commission.
He claimed to belong to Lohar companymunity, which according to him was a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Bihar.
While companysidering the candidature of the appellant and while verifying his claim as belonging to Scheduled Tribe in the State of Bihar, the Union Public Service Commission prime facie came to the companyclusion that the Lohar companymunity was number included in the list of Scheduled Tribes for the State of Bihar issued by the Government of India.
The appellant thereafter filed Writ Petition No.
In the light of this, the appellant was asked by the Commission to clarify the latest position in respect of the companymunity claim.
The Bench issued an interim direction on 18.02.1993 directing the Commission to permit the appellant to appear in the examination provisionally as a member of the Lohar companymunity as a Scheduled Tribe.
The Single Judge of the High Court in its judgment dated 5.7.1999 held that the question, as to whether Lohar was a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Bihar stands companycluded by a judgment of this Court in Nityanands case supra and accordingly held that Lohar companymunity is Other Backward Class OBC and number a Scheduled Tribe.
The facts are taken from Civil Appeal No.
The point in issues is companycluded against the appellant by a judgment of this Court in Nityanand Sharma and Anr.
The Commission addressed a companymunication to the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to ascertain if Lohar companymunity was recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in Bihar.
This Court disposed of the appeal on 12.9.1990 by passing the following order Special Leave granted.
entry 22 the position as existing from 1956 was maintained.
Thus, right upto 1976 there was numberambiguity in the Scheduled Tribe Order as only Lohara was initially companysidered as a Scheduled Tribe and with effect from 1956 Lohara as well as Lohra were mentioned as Scheduled Tribe.
The first litigation which came to the Supreme Court on this subject was Civil Appeal No.
Lohars are being treated as Other Backward Classes whereas he claims to be a member of Scheduled Tribes under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order.
4631 of 1990 in the case of Shambhu Nath v. Union of India and Anr.
The appellant being aggrieved filed letters patent appeal in the High Court which has been dismissed by the impugned order.
173 of 2002 and 488 of 2000 filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India Point involved in all these cases being the same, they are disposed of by a companymon judgment.
The Court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad to issue a provisional caste certificate describing the appellant as Lohar belonging to the Scheduled Tribe with the stipulation that the same shall be subject to the final result of the writ petition pending in the High Court.
v. State of Bihar and Ors.
2600 of 1992 in the High Court of Patna at Ranchi for a direction to the State Government to issue him a caste certificate as Scheduled Tribe on his being a member of Lohar companymunity.
Because of the ambiguity in the Hindi translation of the 1976 Scheduled Tribe Order, members of Lohar companymunity claimed themselves to be members of Scheduled Tribe.
5483 of 2000.
This appeal has been filed by a member of Lohar companymunity from the State of Bihar.
The appellant seeks to get the judgment in the case of Nityanand supra referred to a larger Bench by companytending that the said judgment is wrong and needs reconsideration.
5483 of 2000 and Writ Petition Nos.
Ashok Bhan, J. This judgment shall dispose of Civil Appeal No.
Prabhat Kumar Sharma, the appellant herein, was a candidate for the Civil Services Examinations held during the years 1991, 1992, 1993 1994.
In the year 1976 the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Amendment Act, 1976 was passed and in the English version of the same, viz.
According to the report of the Kaka Kalelkar Commission, amongst the list of Backward Classes, Lohar was, shown at S. No.
