The Uttarakhand High Court, sitting in Nainital, has taken a significant step in a case alleging serious constitutional overreach by the state government. The court has issued formal notices to both the central and Uttarakhand state governments, demanding their responses within four weeks. This action follows a writ petition that accuses the state of a "failure of the constitutional machinery" due to the illegal inclusion of 48 non-Scheduled Castes into the official SC list.
Petition Seeks President's Rule, Cites Constitutional Breach
The petition was filed by Meenu, a resident of Sikrauda village in Haridwar. In a bold move, the petitioner has sought the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution. The core argument is that the Uttarakhand government, through the actions of a former principal secretary of social welfare, violated the supreme law of the land.
The petition contends that in 2013 and 2014, the state administration unlawfully added 48 castes to the Scheduled Castes list. This, according to the plea, is a direct infringement of Article 341 of the Constitution, which grants the exclusive power to modify the SC list solely to the Parliament and the President of India.
High Court's Order and Government's Acknowledgment
In an order dated December 5, a bench led by the Chief Justice issued notices to several high-ranking officials. These include the Union Home Secretary, the Law and Justice Secretary, the Secretary of the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MoSJE), and the principal secretaries of Uttarakhand's social welfare and law departments. All have been directed to file their replies within the stipulated four weeks. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for January 6, 2026.
The petitioner had earlier sent representations on November 4, 2025, to the President of India, the Uttarakhand Governor, the Chief Secretary, and the MoSJE. Documents reveal that the Haridwar District Magistrate forwarded Meenu's memorandum to the Governor and the President on November 11. The central ministry has acknowledged the concerns. A letter dated December 2 from an Under-Secretary of the Government of India stated that the MoSJE had taken action on the Article 341 matter and had sent a communication to Uttarakhand's principal secretary of social welfare on November 28.
Broader Implications and Additional Grievances
The petition argues that the state government's action constitutes a "clear violation" of both the Constitution and established legal precedents, including a recent 2024 ruling by a Supreme Court division bench. By usurping the powers of Parliament and the President, the state allegedly enabled the distribution of reservation benefits meant for genuine SC communities to ineligible individuals. This impacts admissions in educational institutions, appointments in government services, and political reservations.
Furthermore, the petitioner highlighted another critical lapse: the non-establishment of special/exclusive courts for the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Uttarakhand. This is despite a presidential order mandating their creation, which was issued on January 26, 2016. This point underscores broader systemic failures in implementing safeguards for marginalized communities in the state.
The case now places the spotlight on the boundaries of state power and the strict constitutional process governing reservations. The responses from the central and state governments, due in the coming weeks, will be crucial in determining the legal and political trajectory of this significant matter.
