REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2202 OF 2012
 
Adivasis for Social and 
Human Rights Action       …Appellant
versus
Union of India & Ors.             ...Respondents
 
J  U  D  G  M  E  N  T
ABHAY S. OKA, J .
FACTUAL ASPECTS
1. In exercise of powers under sub­clause (2) of Clause 6
of   the   Fifth   Schedule   to   the   Constitution   of   India,   on   31 st
December 1977, the Hon’ble President of India declared the
entire   District   of   Sundargarh   in   the   State   of   Orissa   as   a
Scheduled   Area   (for   short,   ‘the   Scheduled   Area’).     The
appellant,   a   society   registered   under   the   Societies
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  1  of  21

Registration   Act,   1860,   invoked   the   writ   jurisdiction   of   the
High   Court   under   Article   226   of   the   Constitution   of   India.
The   first   contention   raised   in   the   writ   petition   was   that   in
the   Scheduled   Area,   except   for   the   members   of   the
Scheduled   Tribes,   no   one   has   the   right   to   settle   down.     A
contention was raised in the writ petition that every person,
who does not belong to Scheduled Tribe and residing in the
Scheduled Area, is an unlawful occupant and, therefore, is
disentitled   to  exercise  his   right   to   vote  in   any  constituency
in the Scheduled Area.   Further contention raised was that
every   constituency   in   the   Scheduled   Area   should   be
declared as a reserved constituency under Articles 330 and
332 of the Constitution of India.  It was also contended that
no   candidate,   other   than   the   candidates   belonging   to   the
Scheduled   Tribes,   should   have   the   right   to   contest   the
elections   of   the   Legislative   Assembly   or   the   Lok   Sabha   in
the Scheduled Area.
2. Another   contention   raised   in   the   petition   is   that   in
view   of   sub­clause   (1)   of   Clause   5   of   the   Fifth   Schedule
unless there is a specific notification issued by the Hon’ble
Governor   of   the   State   applying   any   particular   Central   or
State law to a Scheduled Area, none of the provisions of the
Central   or   State   laws   are   applicable   to   that   particular
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  2  of  21

Scheduled   Area.     Therefore,   it   was   urged   that   the
Representation of the People Act, 1950 (for short, ‘the 1950
Act’)   and   the   Delimitation   Act,   2002   (for   short,   ‘the   2002
Act’)   are   not   applicable   to   the   Scheduled   Area   in   the
absence   of   any   such   notification.     A   Division   Bench   of   the
High Court of Orissa, by the impugned judgment, dismissed
the   writ   petition.     Being   aggrieved   by   the   decision   of   the
High Court of Orissa, the present appeal has been preferred
pursuant   to   the   grant   of   leave   by   this   Court   vide   order
dated 14 th
 February 2012.
SUBMISSIONS 
3. The   first   contention   raised   by   the   learned   counsel
appearing for the appellant is that none of the laws enacted
by   the   Central   or   the   State   Legislature   are   applicable   to   a
Scheduled Area unless there is a specific notification issued
under   sub­clause   (1)   of   Clause   5   of   the   Fifth   Schedule   by
the  Hon’ble Governor  declaring  that  any  particular  law will
be   applicable   to   the   Scheduled   Area.     He   submitted   that
Article   244(1)   provides   that   the   provisions   of   the   Fifth
Schedule   shall   apply   to   the   administration   and   control   of
the   Scheduled   Areas.     Therefore,   what   is   provided   in   Fifth
Schedule   shall   be   considered   as   a   law   made   by   the
Constitution of India.   His submission is that no law made
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  3  of  21

by   the   Central   or   the   State   Legislature   can  be  applied  to   a
Scheduled   Area   in   the   absence   of   a   specific   notification
issued   by   the   Hon’ble   Governor,   and   therefore,   such   law
shall   be   treated   as   null   and   void.     He   submitted   that   only
the laws made under the Constitution of India in exercise of
power under the Fifth Schedule will apply to the Scheduled
Areas.  He submitted that any law made by the State or the
Central Legislature in its application to the Scheduled Area
will   be   in   derogation   of   the   provisions   of   Article   244   of   the
Constitution of India and therefore, such laws are void.
4. He   submitted   that   the   Hon’ble   Governor   of   the   State
must first decide which Acts of the Parliament or the State
Legislature   should   apply   to   Scheduled   Areas   of   the   State.
After satisfying himself that a particular enactment needs to
be applied to a particular Scheduled Area, he must issue a
notification   making   applicable   the   law   to   the   Scheduled
Area.     He   submitted   that   unless   a   specific   notification   is
issued   by   the   Hon’ble   Governor   clearly   incorporating   the
title and other particulars of every Act of the Parliament and
the   State   Legislature,   which   will   be   applied   to   the
Scheduled Area, no Act of Parliament or State Legislature is
applicable to a Scheduled Area. 
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  4  of  21

5. Inviting   our   attention   to   the   Fundamental   Rights
guaranteed   under   sub­clause   (e)   of   Clause   (1)   of   Article  19
of the Constitution of India, he submitted that what prevails
in the Scheduled Areas is the law made in accordance with
Clause 5 of the Fifth Schedule.
6. The   learned   counsel   relied   upon   the   decisions   of   the
Federal   Court   in   the   case   of   Raja   Bahadur   Kamakshya
Narain   Singh   of   Ramgarh   v.   Commissioner   of   Income
Tax   Bihar 1
  and   in   the   case   of   Chatturam   v.
Commissioner   of   Income   Tax 2
  in   support   of   the
interpretation made by him of sub­clause (1) of Clause 5 of
the Fifth Schedule.   In the statement of case, the appellant
has submitted that as the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not
notified   by   the   Hon’ble   Governor,   the   said   law   is   not
applicable  to   the   Scheduled  Area.    We  have   also  heard   the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
OUR VIEW
7. The   first   question   to   be   answered   by   this   Court   is
whether   the   Central   and   the   State   Acts   can   apply   to   a
Scheduled   Area   unless   a   specific   notification   making   the
said Acts applicable to the Scheduled Area is issued by the
1  (1947) Federal Court Reports 130
2  AIR 1947 FC 32
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  5  of  21

Hon’ble   Governor.     Clause   5   of   the   Fifth   Schedule   reads
thus: 
“5.   Law   applicable   to   Scheduled   Areas.
— (1)   Notwithstanding anything in this
Constitution,   the   Governor   may   by
public   notification   direct   that   any
particular   Act   of   Parliament   or   of   the
Legislature of the State shall not apply
to a Scheduled Area or any part thereof
in   the   State   or   shall   apply   to   a
Scheduled   Area   or   any   part   thereof   in
the   State   subject   to   such   exceptions
and modifications as he may specify in
the   notification   and   any   direction
given  under  this  sub­paragraph  may be
given   so   as   to   have   retrospective
effect.  
(2)   The   Governor   may   make   regulations
for the peace and good government of any
area in a State which is for the time being
a Scheduled Area.
In particular and without prejudice to the
generality   of   the   foregoing   power,   such
regulations may— 
(a) prohibit or restrict the transfer of land
by   or   among   members   of   the   Scheduled
Tribes in such area; 
(b)   regulate   the   allotment   of   land   to
members of the Scheduled Tribes in such
area;
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  6  of  21

(c) regulate the carrying on of business as
money­lender by persons who lend money
to   members   of   the   Scheduled   Tribes   in
such area. 
(3)   In   making   any   such   regulation   as   is
referred   to   in   sub­paragraph   (2)   of   this
paragraph,   the   Governor   may   repeal   or
amend   any   Act   of   Parliament   or   of   the
Legislature   of   the   State   or   any   existing
law which is for the time being applicable
to the area in question. 
(4)   All   regulations   made   under   this
paragraph shall be submitted forthwith to
the   President   and,   until   assented   to   by
him, shall have no effect.
(5) No regulation shall be made under this
paragraph   unless   the   Governor   making
the   regulation   has,   in   the   case   where
there  is  a  Tribes Advisory  Council  for  the
State, consulted such Council. ”
(emphasis added)
8. On a plain reading of sub­clause (1) of Clause 5 of the
Fifth   Schedule,   the   power   of   the   Hon’ble   Governor   under
the said sub­clause (1) extends to:
i. directing   by   a   notification   that   a   particular   Central
or   State   legislation   will   not   apply   to   a   Scheduled
Area in the State, and;
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  7  of  21

ii. directing by a notification that a particular State or
Central   Act   will   apply   to   a   Scheduled   Area   subject
to certain modifications.
The first part of sub­clause (1) proceeds on the footing that
all   the   State   and   Central   legislations   applicable   to   a   State
are applicable to the Scheduled Areas within the said State.
Otherwise,   there   was   no   reason   to   confer   a   power   on   the
Hon’ble   Governor   to   declare   that   particular   legislation   will
not apply to a particular Scheduled Area.
9. For   interpreting   Clause   5,   the   learned   counsel
appearing for the appellant has relied upon the decisions of
the   Federal   Court   in   the   cases   of   Raja   Bahadur 1
  and
Chhaturam 2
.     Both   the   decisions   deal   with   Section   92   of
the Government of India Act, 1935, which reads thus:  
“Administration   of   Excluded   Areas   and
Partially Excluded Areas:
92.   (1)   The   executive   authority   of   a
Province  extends  to   excluded  and   partially
excluded   areas   therein,   but,
notwithstanding   anything   in   this   Act,
no   Act   of   the   Federal   Legislature   or   of
the Provincial Legislature, shall apply to
an excluded area or a partially excluded
area,   unless   the   Governor   by   public
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  8  of  21

notification   so   directs,   and   the
Governor in giving such a direction with
respect   to   any   Act   may   direct   that   the
Act   shall   in   its   application   to   the   area,
or   to   any   specified   part   thereof,   have
effect   subject   to   such   exceptions   or
modifications as he thinks fit.
(2) The Governor may make regulations for
the   peace   and   good   Government   of   any
area   in   a   Province   which   is   for   the   time
being   an   excluded   area,   or   a   partially
excluded   area,   and   any   regulations   so
made  may   repeal  or   amend  any  Act  of  the
Federal   Legislature   or   of   the   Provincial
Legislature,   or   any   existing   Indian   law,
which   is   for   the   time   being   applicable   to
the area in question.
Regulations   made   under   this   sub­section
shall   be   submitted   forthwith   to   the
Governor­General and until assented to by
him   in   his   discretion   shall   have   no   effect,
and   the   provisions   of   this   Part   of   this   Act
with respect to the power of His Majesty to
disallow Acts shall apply in relation to any
such   regulations   assented   to   by   the
Governor­General as they apply in relation
to Acts of a Provincial Legislature assented
to by him.
(3)   The   Governor   shall,   as   respects   any
area   in   a   Province   which   is   for   the   time
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  9  of  21

being,   an   excluded   area,   exercise   his
functions in his discretion. ”
(emphasis added)
10. By virtue of Article 395, the  Government  of India  Act,
1935   has   been   repealed.     Sub­Section   (1)   of   Section   92   of
the   Government   of   India   Act,   1935   and   sub­clause   (1)   of
Clause   5   of   the   Fifth   Schedule   are   completely   different.
Sub­Section   (1)   of   Section   92   provides   that   no   Act   of   the
Federal Legislature or a Provincial Legislature shall apply to
an   Excluded   Area   unless   the   Governor   by   a   public
notification so directs.  However, sub­Clause (1) of Clause 5
of   the   Fifth   Schedule   confers   a   power   on   the   Hon’ble
Governor   to   issue   a   notification   for   directing   that   a
particular enactment, either State or Central, will not apply
to a Scheduled Area.  He also has the power to direct that a
particular   enactment   will   apply   to   a   Scheduled   Area   with
modifications as may be specified by him in the notification.
Sub­clause (1) of Clause 5 of the Fifth Schedule proceeds on
the basis that all the State and the Central laws which are
otherwise applicable to a State apply to Scheduled Areas in
the   State.     Whereas,   sub­Section   (1)   of   Section   92   of   the
Government   of   India   Act,   1935   provides   that   no   law   of
Federal   or   Provincial   Legislature   will   apply   to   an   Excluded
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  10  of  21

Area unless a notification is issued by the Hon’ble Governor
issuing a specific direction to that effect.  Thus, the reliance
placed   on   sub­Section   (1)   of   Section   92   of   the   Government
of India Act, 1935 is not at all relevant. 
11. The   contention   raised   by   the   appellant   that   unless
there   is   a   specific   notification   issued   by   the   Hon’ble
Governor   applying   Central   or   State   laws   to   a   Scheduled
Area,   the   said   laws   will   not   apply   to   the   said   Scheduled
Area, to say the least, is preposterous.   In fact, the issue is
no   longer   res   integra.     There   is   a   binding   decision   of   the
Constitution   Bench   of   this   Court   in   the   case   of   Chebrolu
Leela Prasad Rao & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh &
Ors 3
.    In paragraph 2 of the said decision, the Constitution
Bench   formulated   the   questions   which   required
consideration.  Paragraph 2 of the said decision reads thus:
“2.   Several   questions   have   been   referred
for   consideration   in   the   order   dated   11­1­
2016   [ Chebrolu   Leela   Prasad   Rao   v.   State
of   A.P. ,   (2021)   11   SCC   526].   We   have
renumbered Questions 1( a ), ( b ), ( c ) and ( d )
based   on   interconnection.   The   questions
are as follows: ( Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao
case   [ Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao   v.   State of
3  (2021) 11 SCC 401
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  11  of  21

A.P. , (2021) 11 SCC 526], SCC p. 527, para
1)
( 1 )   What   is   the   scope   of   Para   5(1),
Schedule V to the Constitution of India?
( a )   Does   the   provision   empower   the
Governor to make a new law?
( b )   Does   the   power   extend   to
subordinate legislation?
( c )   Can   the   exercise   of   the   power
conferred   therein   override   fundamental
rights guaranteed under Part III?
( d )   Does   the   exercise   of   such   power
override   any   parallel   exercise   of   power   by
the President under Article 371­D?
( 2 )   Whether   100%   reservation   is
permissible under the Constitution?
( 3 )   Whether   the   notification   merely
contemplates   a   classification   under   Article
16(1)   and   not   reservation   under   Article
16(4)?
( 4 ) Whether the conditions of eligibility (i.e.
origin and cut­off date) to avail the benefit
of   reservation   in   the   notification   are
reasonable? ”
(emphasis added)
In paragraph 39.1, the Constitution Bench held thus: 
“39. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..  .. .. .. .. .. 
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  12  of  21

39.1.   Para   5(1)   of   Schedule   V   does   not
confer upon Governor power to enact a law
but   to   direct   that   a   particular   Act   of
Parliament   or   the   State   Legislature   shall
not apply  to  a Scheduled Area  or  any  part
thereof   or   shall   apply   with   exceptions   and
modifications,   as   may   be   specified   in   the
notification.   The   Governor   is   not
authorised to enact a new Act under the
provisions   contained   in   Para   5(1)   of
Schedule   V   to   the   Constitution.   Area
reserved   for   the   Governor   under   the
provisions of Para  5(1) is prescribed. He
cannot   act   beyond   its   purview   and   has
to   exercise   power   within   the   four
corners of the provisions.
39.2.  .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ” 
(emphasis added)
In paragraph 40, the Constitution Bench proceeded to hold 
thus:   
“40.   The   Act   of   Parliament   or   the
appropriate   legislature   applies   to   the
Scheduled   Areas.   The   Governor   has   the
power   to   exclude   their   operation   by   a
notification. In the absence thereof, the
Acts   of   the   legislature   shall   extend   to
such   areas.   In   Jatindra   v.   Province   of
Bihar   [ Jatindra   v.   Province   of   Bihar ,   1949
SCC   OnLine   FC   23   :   ILR   (1949)   28   Pat
703 : 1949 FLJ 225] , it was held that the
power   of   the   Governor   under   Para   5   is   a
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  13  of  21

legislative   power   and   the   Governor   is
empowered   to   change   or   modify   the
provisions   of   the   Act   or   the   section   as   he
deems   fit   by   way   of   issuing   a   notification.
The power under Para 5(1) is limited to the
application   of   the   Governor's   decision   to
apply   an   Act   or   making   modification   or
creating   exceptions.   Though   the   power   is
legislative   to   some   extent,   that   is   confined
to   applicability,   modification,   or   creating
exceptions   concerning   the   Act   of
Parliament   or   the   State.   While   Para   5(2)
confers   the   power   of   independent
legislation,   the   Governor   has   plenary
power  of  framing  regulations  for   the  peace
and good governance of a Scheduled Area.
He is the repository of faith to decide as to
the   necessity.   The   Governor   is   empowered
by Para 5(3) to repeal or amend any Act of
Parliament   or   State   Legislature,   following
the   procedure   prescribed   therein,   in
exercise of making regulations as provided
under  Para 5(2) of Schedule V. The aspect
of   power   was   considered   in   Ram   Kirpal
Bhagat   v.   State   of   Bihar   [ Ram   Kirpal
Bhagat   v.   State   of   Bihar ,   (1969)   3   SCC
471 : 1970 SCC (Cri) 154] thus : (SCC pp.
478­80, paras 21­23)
“ 21 .   The   second   question   which   falls   for
consideration   is   whether   the   Bihar
Regulation   I   of   1951   is   in   excess   of   the
Governor's   powers.   The   contentions   were:
first,   that   the   Regulation   I   of   1951   could
not   at   all   have   been   made;   secondly,   that
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  14  of  21

Regulations   deal   with   the   subject­matter
and   did   not   mean   power   to   apply   law   and
thirdly,   the   power   to   extend   a   law   passed
by another legislature was said to be not a
legislative   function,   but   was   a   conditional
legislature.   The   legislation,   in   the   present
case, is in relation to what is described as
Scheduled Areas. The Scheduled Areas are
dealt   with   by   Article   244   of   the
Constitution and the Fifth Schedule to the
Constitution. Prior to the Constitution, the
excluded areas were dealt with by Sections
91 and 92 of the Government of India Act,
1935.   The   excluded   and   the   partially
excluded   areas   were   areas   so   declared   by
Order   in   Council   under   Section   91   and
under   Section   92.   No   act   of   the   Federal
Legislature   or   of   the   Provincial
Legislature   was   to   apply   to   an   excluded
or   a   partially   excluded   area   unless   the
Governor   by   public   notification   so
directed.   Sub­section   (2)   of   Section   92
of   the   Government   of   India   Act,   1935
conferred   power   on   the   Governor   to
make regulations for the peace and good
government   of   any   area   in   a   Province
which   was   an   excluded   or   a   partially
excluded   area   and   any   regulations   so
made might repeal or amend any Act of
the Federal Legislature or the Provincial
Legislature   or   any   existing   Indian   law
which  was for  the  time  being  applicable
to the area in question.   The extent of the
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  15  of  21

legislative   power   of   the   Governor   under
Section 92 of the Government of India Act,
1935   in   making   regulations   for   the   peace
and good government of any area conferred
on   the   Governor   in   the   words   of   Lord
Halsbury   “an   utmost   discretion   of
enactment for the attainment of the objects
pointed to.” (See   Riel   v.   R.   [ Riel   v.   R. , (1885)
LR   10   AC   675   (PC)],   AC   p.   678.)   In   that
case   the  words   which  fell  for consideration
by the  Judicial Committee were  “the power
of Parliament of Canada to make provisions
for   the   administration,   peace,   order   and
good government of any territory not for the
time being included in any province ”. It was
contended   that   if   any   legislation   differed
from   the   provisions   which  in   England   had
been   made   for   the   administration,   peace,
order and good government then the same
could   not   be   sustained   as   valid.   That
contention   was  not   accepted.   These   words
were   held   to   embrace   the   widest   power   to
legislate for the peace and good government
for the area in question .” ”
(emphasis added)
Again,   in   paragraph   52,   the   Constitution   Bench   answered
Question (1)(b) as under:
“52.   We   are   of   the   opinion   that   the
Governor's   power   to   make   new   law   is
not   available   in   view   of   the   clear
language   of   Para   5(1),   Fifth   Schedule
does   not   recognise   or   confer   such
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  16  of  21

power,   but   only   power   is   not   to   apply
the law or to apply it with exceptions or
modifications.   Thus,   the   notification   is
ultra vires to Para 5(1) of Schedule V to the
Constitution. ”
(emphasis added)
12. In   paragraph   80,   the   Constitution   Bench   answered
Question (1)(c).  Paragraph 80 reads thus: 
“80.   The   power   is   conferred   on   the
Governor to deal with the Scheduled
Areas.   It   is   not   meant   to   prevail
over   the   Constitution.   The   power   of
the   Governor   is   pari   passu   with   the
legislative power of Parliament and the
State.   The   legislative   power   can   be
exercised   by   Parliament   or   the   State
subject   to   the   provisions   of   Part   III   of
the   Constitution.   In   our   considered
opinion,   the   power   of   the   Governor
does not supersede the fundamental
rights   under   Part   III   of   the
Constitution.   It   has   to   be   exercised
subject   to   Part   III   and   other
provisions of the Constitution.  When
Para   5   of   the   Fifth   Schedule   confers
power on the Governor, it is not meant
to   be  conferral  of  arbitrary  power.  The
Constitution   can   never   aim   to   confer
any   arbitrary   power   on   the
constitutional   authorities.   They   are   to
be   exercised   in   a   rational   manner
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  17  of  21

keeping   in   view   the   objectives   of   the
Constitution.   The   powers   are   not   in
derogation   but   the   furtherance   of   the
constitutional aims and objectives. ”
(emphasis added)
13. Therefore, to conclude; 
(i) All   the   Central   and   the   State   laws   which   are
applicable to the entire State of Orissa will continue
to   apply   to   the   Scheduled   Area   unless,   in   exercise
of   powers   under   sub­clause   (1)   of   Clause   5   of   the
Fifth   Schedule,   there   is   a   specific   notification
issued by the Hon’ble Governor making a particular
enactment inapplicable, either fully or partially; 
(ii) The power of the Hon’ble Governor under Clause 5
of the Fifth Schedule is restricted to directing that a
particular law will not apply to the Scheduled Area
or   it   will   apply   with   such   modifications   as   may   be
specified   in   the   notification   issued   under   sub­
clause (1) of Clause 5 of the Fifth Schedule or while
making   Regulations   in   terms   of   sub­clause   (2)   of
Clause 5 of the Fifth Schedule;
(iii) The power of the Hon’ble Governor under Clause 5
of   the   Fifth   Schedule   does   not   supersede   the
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  18  of  21

Fundamental   Rights   under   Part   III   of   the
Constitution of India; and
(iv) Therefore,   the   Fundamental   Rights   conferred   by
sub­clause (e) of Article 19(1) of the Constitution of
India   on   the   citizens   can   also   be   exercised   in
relation to the Scheduled Area.
14. Under   sub­clause  (e)   of   Clause   (1)   of  Article   19   of  the
Constitution of India, every citizen has a right to reside and
settle   in   any   part   of   the   territory   of   India.     However,   by
making   a   law,   reasonable   restrictions   can   be   put   on   the
said Fundamental Right as provided in Clause (5) of Article
19.     Therefore,   we   reject   the   argument   that   non­Tribals
have no right to settle down in a Scheduled Area.
15. The argument that the Fifth Schedule is a law made by
the   Parliament   is   misconceived.     Even   assuming   that   Fifth
Schedule   is   a   law,   it   does   not   put   any   constraints   on   the
exercise   of   the   Fundamental   Rights   under   Article   19(1)   of
the Constitution of India.
16. Now, we come to the second question whether  a non­
Tribal has the right to vote in a Scheduled Area.   As far as
the right to vote is concerned, the 1950 Act is applicable to
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  19  of  21

the   Scheduled   Area   and   therefore,   the   appellant   cannot
contend   that   only   a   person   belonging   to   Scheduled   Tribe
can   cast   a   vote   in   elections   of   the   constituencies   in   the
Scheduled Area.   The right to vote will be governed by Part
III   of   the   1950   Act.     Every   eligible   voter   is   entitled   to   be
registered in the electoral roll of a constituency, in which he
is ordinarily residing.   Therefore, any person eligible to vote
who is ordinarily residing in the Scheduled Area has a right
to vote, even if he is a non­Tribal.
17. As regards providing reservation for all the Lok Sabha
and   the   State   Legislative   constituencies   in   a   Scheduled
Area,   the   appellant   cannot   contend   that   all   the
constituencies   in   a   Scheduled   area   should   be   reserved   for
the   Scheduled   Tribes.     Reservation   is   required   to   be   made
in   terms   of   Articles   330   and   332   of   the   Constitution   of
India.     These   provisions   do   not   provide   that   all   the
constituencies in the Scheduled Areas shall be reserved for
Scheduled   Tribes.     Moreover,   the   2002   Act   is   applicable   to
the   Scheduled   Area.       Therefore,   even   the   said   prayer   to
issue a writ of  mandamus , as regards the reservation for the
Scheduled Tribes, deserves to be rejected. 
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  20  of  21

18. The   Land   Acquisition   Act,   1894   was   made   applicable
to   the   whole   of   India   except   the   State   of   Jammu   and
Kashmir.     In   the   absence   of   the   exercise   of   power   by   the
Hon’ble   Governor   under   sub­clause   (1)   of   Clause   5   of   the
Fifth   Schedule,   the   said   law   was   applicable   to   the
Scheduled Area. 
19. We   are,   therefore,   of   the   view   that   there   is   absolutely
no merit in the appeal, and the High Court was right when
it dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. Only in
view   of   the   claim   that   the   appellant   is   working   for   the
welfare   of   the   tribals   that   we   refrain   from   saddling   the
appellant with costs.
20. Hence,   the   appeal   is   dismissed   with   no   order   as   to
costs.
…..….……………J.
    (Abhay S. Oka)
…...………………J.
            (Rajesh Bindal)
New Delhi;
May 10, 2023.   
Civil Appeal No.2202 of 2012
Page  21  of  21