Anita vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 15886 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 86/2021

Anita D/o Shri Dalvir Singh, Aged About 33 Years, W/o Shri Lokesh Singh, B/c Jat, R/o Ward No. 11 Surota Lakhan Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur (Raj.).

----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Education Department (Elementary) , Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director / Commissioner Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Chief Executive Officer Zila Parishad, Pali (Raj.)

4. The District Education Officer, Pali (Raj.)

5. The Vikas Adhikari Panchayat Samiti Bali, District Pali (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sushil Bishnoi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Order

21/10/2021

This appeal has been filed by the original petitioner to

challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in CWP

No.7655/2020.

By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge had

disposed of three petitions. One one of the petitioners has filed

the appeal.

Shortly stated the facts are that the appellant-petitioner

applied to the post of Teacher Grade-III pursuant to advertisement

(2 of 3) [SAW-86/2021]

issued by the respondents on 11.09.2017. The appellant-

petitioner along with application form produced caste certificate

issued in the name of her husband. Thereafter, she produced

another caste certificate issued in her father's name and sought

appointment to the said post as OBC candidate. The appellant-

petitioner was selected, offered appointment and also joined the

duties. Subsequently, the Director of Education issued a notice

dated 05.11.2019 proposing to cancel her selection. The

appellant-petitioner objected the same. Despite this, appellant's

services were terminated by order dated 09.06.2020. The

appellant-petitioner had challenged the same before the learned

Single Judge. The petition came to be dismissed by the impugned

judgment on the ground that the petitioner belongs to OBC

category in the State of Haryana and upon her migration to State

of Rajasthan by marriage, she would not carry her caste status.

According to the respondent thus the appellant-petitioner could

not have availed the benefit of reservation upon her migration to

the State of Rajasthan. The learned Single Judge dismissed the

writ petition along with two connected petitions on record.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the documents.

The issue of carrying caste certificate by a person belonging

to reserved category upon migration from one State to another

State is settled by a judgment of Supreme Court in case of Marri

Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. Seth G.S. Medical College [(1990)

3 SCC 130] and it is concluded by a Constitutional Bench

judgment in case of Ranjana Kumari Vs. State of Uttarakhand

& Ors. [(2019) 15 SCC 664]. The following observations were

made in para 4 of the judgment:

(3 of 3) [SAW-86/2021]

"Two Constitutional Bench judgments of this Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao vs. Seth G.S. Medical College and Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scs/STs v. Union of India have taken the view that merely because in the migrant State the same caste is recognised as Scheduled Caste, the migrant cannot be recognised as Scheduled Caste of the migrant State. The issuance of a caste certificate by the State of Uttarakhand, as in the present case, cannot dilute the rigours of the Constitution Bench judgments in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao and Action Committee."

In view of the concluded legal position, the respondents were

justified perfectly justified in terminating services of the appellant-

petitioner after giving opportunity of hearing.

Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner, however, raised

a strange argument that the judgment must be applied

prospectively. It is well-settled that decision of Supreme Court

clarifies the correct position of law and in terms of Article 141 of

the Constitution of India becomes a law of land and would be

applicable to all pending cases.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

                                   (SANDEEP MEHTA),J                                            (AKIL KURESHI),CJ
                                       50-a.asopa/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)