Supreme Court order may hit similar other statutory bodies NEW DELHI: Limiting the power of National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC), Supreme Court has held that it is a recommendatory and advisory body and does not have the authority to pass an adjudicatory order.Abench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih said the commission can send its recommendations to a state or Centre in discharge of its functions. However, an order passed by NCSC is not binding in servicerelated matters, it clarified.“The powers entrusted to NCSC are limited in nature. Clearly, NCSC and its other compatriots under articles 338A and 338B are constitutional bodies with a socially beneficent purpose but quite apparently, the legislature has prescribed a role that is recommendatory and advisory, but certainly not adjudicatory. They are not meant to be bodies taking over adjudicatory functions,” the bench said.The court’s order could be applicable to other statutory and constitutional bodies set up for the benefit of different groups of people like women, the minorities and backward classes.Join conversationView All Comments →Share your thoughts in the commentsInsightfulAgreeDisagreeSkepticalConcerningPromisingWorth ReadingBig DevelopmentPost CommentBe respectful · TOI community guidelinesExplaining the clause which says that the commission is empowered to “inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes”, the bench said, “it is therefore clear that while it has powers to requisition documents and receive evidence, it does not have the power to make an order in furtherance of that evidence.In other words, NCSC can record a factual finding and then ask the govt concerned, either the Centre or the State, to act thereupon.”It rejected NCSC’s plea that the word “safeguards” mentioned in the provision pertains to enforcement. “Such a submission is difficult to accept in view of the explicit language of the Article. It certainly does not confer adjudicatory power; at best recommendatory in nature,” the court said.Thus, the commission cannot take up the role of a court or an adjudicatory tribunal and determine the rights of parties, court added.Get the latest India News and Live updates. Download the TOI app.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos‘Vasteguna Huiya, Kuchu-Puchu, FOMO’: Viral Gen Z Vocabulary Echoes In ParliamentBihar Man Claims He Was Booked In NEET Leak Protest Viral Video Sparks Questions Over Protest FIRs’Dear Saurav…’ BJP MP Kangana Ranaut Tells CJP’s Saurav Das To ‘Learn Some Skill’ | Watch’Detaining Activists Is Normal’: JP Nadda Defends Police Crackdown On CJP ProtestersWho Is V Kamakoti? IIT Madras Director And Exam Reforms Task Force Member Draws Political FireKhawaja Asif Calls POK Protesters “Enemies Like India” Amid Deadly Crackdown; Statement Sparks StirLok Sabha Passes Anti-Paper Leak Bill Amid Ruckus Over Rahul’s ‘Shooting’ Charge Against Amit Shah’Put Pellets Into Blood Of Our Students,’ Rahul Gandhi’s Attack On Hm Shah In LS Sparks Uproar’Student, Idiot, Andhbhakt’: Rahul Gandhi’s ‘3 Categories’ Remark Sparks Row In Lok SabhaPoJK Burns Amid Violence And Protests: Why The World’s Silence And The Crisis Matter To India123Photostories7 fashion mistakes that are secretly making you look older than you areYou’ve crossed it countless times, but do you know why it’s called a zebra crossing?’Avengers: Doomsday’: What details did fans miss in the trailer? Here’s what comic book hintsMeghalaya’s Lakadong Turmeric has 10% curcumin, the highest among Indian varieties: What does this actually means for your healthWhy airplane windows are round: The engineering mistake that changed aviation foreverFrom alleging ex-wife Shweta Tiwari’s affair with her Kasautii co-star Cezanne Khan to claiming he Wasn’t allowed to meet their daughter; Raja Chaudhary makes serious allegationsNot a 5 a.m. person? Try these 7 simple morning habits insteadWho Is Isha Rikhi? Badshah’s wife’s emotional post sparks separation rumours6 ways to make hard-boiled eggs easier to peel; Physics explains why one method works best5 psychology-backed lessons every father should teach his son about people and life123Hot PicksMCC new rulesJalen HurtsDelhi Lakshmi YojanaTN CM Vijay’s new officeRussian sanctions billCWG 2026 GamesSmartphone exportsTN supplementary resultsNew anti-paper leak billTop TrendingTony RomosJantar Mantar ProtestKarnataka SuicideBJP MLA Yashpal Suvarna ArrestGurgaon Road RageAbhijeet Dipke Marriage ProposalsUGC PG ProgrammeWeather TomorrowPalani Mutt Temple Land CaseStock Market Up
NEW DELHI: Limiting the power of National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC), Supreme Court has held that it is a recommendatory and advisory body and does not have the authority to pass an adjudicatory order.Abench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih said the commission can send its recommendations to a state or Centre in discharge of its functions. However, an order passed by NCSC is not binding in servicerelated matters, it clarified.“The powers entrusted to NCSC are limited in nature. Clearly, NCSC and its other compatriots under articles 338A and 338B are constitutional bodies with a socially beneficent purpose but quite apparently, the legislature has prescribed a role that is recommendatory and advisory, but certainly not adjudicatory. They are not meant to be bodies taking over adjudicatory functions,” the bench said.The court’s order could be applicable to other statutory and constitutional bodies set up for the benefit of different groups of people like women, the minorities and backward classes.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
Explaining the clause which says that the commission is empowered to “inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes”, the bench said, “it is therefore clear that while it has powers to requisition documents and receive evidence, it does not have the power to make an order in furtherance of that evidence.In other words, NCSC can record a factual finding and then ask the govt concerned, either the Centre or the State, to act thereupon.”It rejected NCSC’s plea that the word “safeguards” mentioned in the provision pertains to enforcement. “Such a submission is difficult to accept in view of the explicit language of the Article. It certainly does not confer adjudicatory power; at best recommendatory in nature,” the court said.Thus, the commission cannot take up the role of a court or an adjudicatory tribunal and determine the rights of parties, court added.
