<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (2) TMI 1534 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470737</link>
    <description>Article 342 confines the specification, inclusion and exclusion of Scheduled Tribes to the constitutional process involving the President and Parliament; a State executive notification cannot confer Scheduled Tribe status on Lohars, who are distinct from the listed Lohara and Lohra communities. Repeal of a prior amendment does not authorise executive alteration of that status, and extending Scheduled Tribe certificates and benefits to Lohars is arbitrary under Article 14. Article 32 remained available because the notification led to criminal proceedings affecting personal liberty. The invalid extension was nullified, Lohara status remained unaffected, criminal proceedings were not quashed, and costs were imposed for the constitutional infringement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 15:07:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1534 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470737</link>
      <description>Article 342 confines the specification, inclusion and exclusion of Scheduled Tribes to the constitutional process involving the President and Parliament; a State executive notification cannot confer Scheduled Tribe status on Lohars, who are distinct from the listed Lohara and Lohra communities. Repeal of a prior amendment does not authorise executive alteration of that status, and extending Scheduled Tribe certificates and benefits to Lohars is arbitrary under Article 14. Article 32 remained available because the notification led to criminal proceedings affecting personal liberty. The invalid extension was nullified, Lohara status remained unaffected, criminal proceedings were not quashed, and costs were imposed for the constitutional infringement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>