Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Damodar Kailash Ben ... on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Rajendra Prakash Soni
[2023/RJJD/004538]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 586/2019
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department of
Medical and Health, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Director, Medical And Health Services, Raj, Jaipur.
3. Addl. Director (Administration), Medical And Health
Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Appellants
Versus
Damodar Kailash Ben D/o Shri Khemji Bhai and wife of Mani Lal
Tabiyad resident of VPO Modar, Tehsil Bicchiwara, district
Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG.
For Respondent(s) : None present.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
JUDGMENT
Judgment pronounced on ::: 13/02/2023
Judgment reserved on ::: 06/02/2023
BY THE COURT : (PER HON'BLE MEHTA, J.)
No one appears on behalf of the respondent despite service.
Short controversy in this appeal is as to whether a female of
ST category in a State outside Rajasthan, would retain Scheduled
Tribe status upon migration upon marriage to a person of same
category in Rajasthan.
The respondent herein, is a resident of State of Gujarat and
was having a caste certificate of Scheduled Tribe issued from State
of Gujarat under the name of her father. She got married to a
[2023/RJJD/004538] (2 of 3) [SAW-586/2019]
person of Scheduled Tribe in Rajathan and therefore, she applied
for the post of Nurse Grade II under the TSP (ST) category
pursuant to the notification dated 26.02.2013 but the appellants
did not consider her case on the ground that the caste certificate
was carrying the name of her husband after migration to State of
Rajasthan. The learned Single Bench accepted the writ petition in
light of another Single Bench Judgment in the case of Pushpa &
Ors. vs. State of Rajashan & Ors. (SBCWP No.12198/2015)
decided on 01.03.2016.
Shri K.S. Rajpurohit, learned AAG has drawn the attention of
the Court to the Division Bench Judgment dated 29.04.2022 in the
case of Damor Savita Bahen vs. State of Rajasthan (D.B.
Special Appeal (Writ) No.277/2021 and urged that the view
taken by the learned Single Bench in the case of Pushpa & Ors.
(supra), does not lay the correct preposition of law in view of the
Judgment in the case of Damor Savita Bahen (supra) which is
based upon the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Ranjana
Kumari vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. reported in 2018
(14) Scale 755 wherein, it was held as under:
"3. The appellant contended before the High Court that she
was a Scheduled Caste of the State of Uttarakhand. The High
Court having rejected the claim, the appellant is in appeal
before us.
4. Two Constitution Bench judgments of this Court in Marri
Chandra Shekhar Rao vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College &
Ors. and Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes in the State of
Maharshtra & Anr. vs. Union of India & Anr. have taken the
view that merely because in the migrant State the same
caste is recognized as Scheduled Caste, the migrant cannot
be recognized as Scheduled Caste of the migrant State. The
issuance of a caste certificate by the State of Uttarakhand,
[2023/RJJD/004538] (3 of 3) [SAW-586/2019]
as in the present case, cannot dilute the rigours of the
Constitution Bench Judgments in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao
(supra) and Action Committee (supra).
5. We, therefore, find no error in the order of the High
Court to justify any interference. The appeal is accordingly
dismissed."
Having considered the submissions advanced by Shri
Rajpurohit and, after going through the impugned Judgment and
the precedents cited at bar, we are of the firm view that a
candidate, who is from outside Rajasthan, would not carry the
caste status of Scheduled Tribe upon being married to a person of
same category in the State of Rajasthan in view of the law as laid
down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ranjana
Kumari (supra) and this Court in the case of Damor Savita
Bahen (supra).
As a consequence, the impugned Judgment dated
03.04.2017 rendered by the learned Single Bench is unsustainable
in the eyes of law and is hereby reversed.
The appeal is allowed accordingly.
(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
23-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
