Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kavita Devi vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 January, 2021
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3911/2020
Kavita Devi W/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Meghwal,
R/o Ward No. 11, Chak 5 Ams, Village Malkheda, Tehsil Bhadra,
District Hanumangarh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Social Justice, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
2. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bhadra.
3. Tehsildar, Bhadra, District Hanumagnarh
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Chotia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.D. Bhadu
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Order
12/01/2021
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being
aggrieved with the action of the respondent No.2 - Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh and
respondent No.3 - Tehsildar Bhadra, District Hanumangarh of
not accepting her application for issuance of a caste
certificate in her favour declaring that she is a member of
Scheduled Caste.
The case of the petitioner is that originally she was
resident of village, Jhanda Khurd, Tehsil Sardulgarh in State
of Punjab, where her caste Ramdasia is categorized as SC. It
is contended that petitioner got married to Mr. Mohan Lal,
resident of Ward No. 11, Chak 5 AMS, Village Malkheda, Tehsil
(2 of 4) [CW-3911/2020]
Bhadra, District Hanumangarh. The husband of the petitioner
is also a member of SC in the State of Rajasthan. It is the
case of the petitioner that earlier she was declared as a
Meghwal but now when she applied before the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh for issuance of SC
certificate in her favour, her application was not accepted on
the ground that she is not resident of State of Rajasthan and,
therefore, the caste certificate declaring her a member of SC
cannot be issued.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the action of the respondents of not accepting the application
of the petitioner for issuing a certificate in her favour
declaring her a member of SC is illegal and contrary to the
law laid down by this Court in various judgments.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on
the decisions rendered by Division Bench of this Court at
Jaipur Bench in State of Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Manju Yadav
(D.B. Special Appeal (W) No.1116/2018) decided on
18.09.2018, by Single Judge at Jodhpur in Jaspal Kaur Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition
No.1059/2020) decided on 28.01.2020 and by Single Judge
at Jaipur Bench in Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
(SB Civil Writ Petition No.4713/2020) decided on
20.07.2020.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents is not in
a position to dispute the fact that the controversy involved in
this writ petition is squarely covered by the above referred
decisions.
(3 of 4) [CW-3911/2020]
Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of
Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Manju Yadav (supra) has held as
under:-
"4. Females outside the State of Rajasthan on
migrating to Rajasthan, post marriage may not be
entitled to the benefit of reservation in public
employment in the State of Rajasthan on account
of being a member of a SC or ST or OBC in another
State.
5. But these ladies would certainly be entitled to
be issued a SC or ST or OBC certificate. For the
reason, apart from reservation in public
employment these certificates may be relevant for
grant of some benefit. For example, it may be a
housing scheme. A migrant lady may claim benefit
on the strength of the certificate if the scheme
envisages domicile or residence as the entitlement
for a house or a flat with reservation provided.
6. Under the circumstances, we find no infirmity
in the directions issued by the learned Single Judge
as to what procedure needs to be followed for grant
of an OBC certificate applied for by a female who
has migrated, post marriage, to the State of
Rajasthan. We make it clear once again. Issue of
public employment and benefit of reservation has
been decided by the Supreme Court and thus our
present order would not be misconstrued as
enabling anybody to the benefit of reservation. The
present order concerns only to the issuance of a
certificate applied for."
(4 of 4) [CW-3911/2020]
This Court reiterated the above referred position of law
in Jaspal Kaur (supra) and Santosh (supra).
So it is clear that the petitioner is not entitled for
reservation in public employment in the State of Rajasthan
being the resident of State of Punjab, however, she can get
the other benefits as being an SC on the strength of the
certificate if the scheme envisages domicile or residence as
entitlement.
In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is
allowed. The respondent No.2 Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Bhadra, District Hanumangarh is directed to issue only a
caste certificate to the petitioner with clarification that this
certificate is not for taking benefit in public employment in
the State of Rajasthan, within a period of one week from the
date of submission of certified copy of this order.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
23-Arun/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
