Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2.1. In fact, the petitioners filed the writ petitions to quash the notifications under Annexures-4, 5 & 6 series, whereby, the State Government amalgamated the following villages, namely, Jagda of Jagda Gram Panchayat, Jhartarang, Brahmani Tarang, Sana Brahmani Tarang and Gopa Palli of Jhartarang Gram Panchayat situate under the Schedule Area of Sundargarh district with the Rourkela Municipal Corporation and duly notified it in Orissa Gazette as illegal, hence, to be struck down for having violated the provisions of Article 243-ZC of the Constitution of India besides the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (in short „the PESA‟) and the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

2.4. According to the petitioners, the notifications under Annexures-4, 5 & 6 series are illegal and in gross violation of the constitutional provisions and in particular, Article 243-ZC and has seriously affected the rights given to the inhabitants of the Scheduled Areas under the PESA and The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and all the more when, the same has not been accomplished by a Parliamentary law and therefore, it shall have to be set at naught and declared unconstitutional.

3.3. The introduction of Part IX-A led to necessary amendment to the provisions of the Orissa Municipal Act for the purpose of strengthening the Municipalities giving effective and adequate representation to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and women in the Scheduled Areas of the State and therefore, it was considered expedient to apply the provisions of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 as amended to the Scheduled Areas of the State and accordingly, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause 5(1) of Part-B of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India, the notification dated 14th August, 1995 was issued declaring thereby that any action taken or things done by the State Government under the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 so applied to the Scheduled Areas of the State shall be deemed to have been validly taken or done and not only that, the Hon‟ble Governor of Odisha vide notification dated 7th August, 1996 directed that the amendment made by the Orissa Municipal (Amendment) Act, 1995 (Orissa Act 19 of 1995) except Clause (b) of Section 2, Clauses (i) & (ii) of Section 5 and Clause (ii) of Section 6 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 to apply to the Scheduled Areas of the State with effect from 19th October, 1995 and therefore, the plea of the petitioners that there is violation of Article 243- ZC of the Constitution and the provisions of the PESA and the Forest Rights Act, 2006 are devoid of merit and hence, liable to be rejected.

13. Article 243-ZC of Part-IX A of the Constitution of India clearly indicates that it shall not be applicable to the Scheduled Areas and may be extended only with the parliamentary intervention. In the case at hand, Part-IX A has not been made applicable to the Scheduled Areas of the State. It is also a fact that no similar law like PESA is in place to govern the Scheduled Areas to bring it within the sweep of the Orissa Municipal Corporation Act. Though a Bill was introduced in the year 2001 to extend the provisions of the Municipalities to the Scheduled Areas similar to the PESA, but it could not become a law. But the Court is inclined to accept the view and the conclusion reached at by the Rajasthan High Court in Ankit Kumar Meena (supra) which is to the effect that there has been no notification issued by the Governor as per Fifth Schedule to extend or modify the operation of the Orissa Municipal Corporation to the Scheduled Areas and that mere constitutional status of an area as a Scheduled Area by itself creates an absolute constitutional embargo on the application of the State legislation nor does it divest the State Government from its statutory authority to reorganize the territories of the Corporation.