The High Court of Jharkhand while dismissing a petition of a woman claiming reservation based on her husband held that on the mere ground that the caste certificate of the petitioner for the S.T category has been issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda, she cannot claim the benefit of reservation in the State of Jharkhand in view of the settled position of law that a person, who has migrated to the other State, shall get benefit of reservation only in the State of origin.
Brief Facts:
The present writ petition has been filed for declaring the petitioner to have passed in the Combined Graduate Trained Teacher Competitive Examination, 2016 for appointment to the post of Teacher (Hindi) as after being declared successful in the ‘Main’ examination, she was called for certificate verification, however, her candidature in the Scheduled Tribe (S.T) category was rejected on the ground that she had submitted the caste certificate of S.T on the basis of her husband.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the state of origin of the petitioner is State of Bihar and she belongs to the ‘Lohara’ caste and she solemnized marriage with a person, who is a resident of the State of Jharkhand and also belongs to the same caste and after marriage, the petitioner applied for issuance of caste certificate of Scheduled Tribe (S.T) and local resident certificate before the competent authority of State of Jharkhand giving details of her husband in pursuance of which the Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda issued residential certificate as well as caste certificate to her.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on the behalf of respondent contended that t the issue raised in the present writ petition is no more res integra as in the case of Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & Others wherein it was held that treating the determination under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution to be valid for all over the country would be in negation to the very purpose and scheme and language of Article 341 read with Article 15(4) of the Constitution.
Observations of the court:
The court referred to the judgment in the case of Ranjana Kumari Vs. State of Uttarakhand & ors., wherein it was held that merely because in the migrant State, the same caste is recognized as ‘Scheduled Caste’, the migrant cannot be treated as a member of ‘Scheduled Caste’ of the migrant State. Further, the court referred to the judgement in Kanchan Kumari & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. wherein it was held that the issue is no more res integra that a person, who has migrated to the other State, shall get the benefit of reservation only in his/her parent State i.e., the State of origin and not in the migrant State, even though the caste of that person is being given the benefit of reservation in the migrant State.
The court stated that in the present case, the admitted fact is that the state of origin of the petitioner is State of Bihar and she migrated to State of Jharkhand after her marriage and the petitioner obtained a caste certificate from the office of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda by giving the address of her husband as her place of residence and thus on the mere ground that caste certificate of the petitioner for S.T category has been issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda, she cannot claim the benefit of reservation in the State of Jharkhand in view of the settled position of law that a person, who has migrated to the other State, shall get the benefit of reservation only in the State of origin.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Rina Kumari Rana @ Reena Kumari Rana vs State of Jharkhand and ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Shankar
Case No.: W.P.(S) No. 3050 of 2019
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Abhishek Srivastava
Advocate for the Respondent: Ms. Sweta Shukla and Mr. Sanjay Piprawall
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
