y SAKTI v. STATE OF A.P. & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 2805 of 2000) APRIL 24, 2009 [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 ~ …. 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 SAKTI v. STATE OF AP. & ORS. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2003 (State
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 (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 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 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 G appointment in terms of Section 21(2) of the Central Act.
j · ···~[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 'r' A Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No. 11543 of 1999.
R. Venkataramani, Satya Mitra Garg Alzo for the Appellants. 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 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 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 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. & 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 H Act') and the notification issued thereunder on 7.11.2003 SAKTI v. STATE OF A.P. & ORS.
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] constituting a Commission is to discharge such functions as 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.
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 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:- 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
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 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
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, – (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
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 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 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 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 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 measures taken by itself and by the State Governments SAKTI v. STATE OF A.P. & ORS.
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] in pursuance of the provisions of this section." 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 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.
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 c
or under any order of the Government and to evaluate the 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 preferably within six months from today.
10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. D.G. Appeal disposed of.