Priya Tomar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2040 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Priya Tomar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 17 March, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                                         COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures



                                  WPMS No.634 of 2026
                                  Priya Tomar                                                   ............Petitioner
                                                            Vs.
                                  State of Uttarakhand and others                               ..........Respondents

                                  Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned S.C. for the State.

3. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioner challenges the orders dated 06.03.2026 and 07.03.2026, by which the applications filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Permanent Resident Certificate as well as a Caste Certificate under the O.B.C. category, have been rejected.

4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Village- Jhabiran, Tehsil-Roorkee, District-Haridwar and belongs to the O.B.C. Category and was earlier issued the O.B.C. Category Certificate by the Competent Authority, but the second time when the petitioner made an application for issuance of the O.B.C. Caste Certificate, the same has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is married to a person from the State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, she is not entitled to get the O.B.C. Caste Certificate.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prima facie the order impugned are incorrect as the caste of a person is determined by the birth of a person and therefore she cannot be denied the certificate only on the

ground that she was married to some person from the State of Uttar Pradesh.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in order to buttress his submission, has relied upon two judgments of this Court, which are quoted as under:-

1. Neha Saini Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another reported in 2009 SCC Online Utt 989.

2. Dr. Madhu Arya Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others reported in 2011 SCC Online Utt 436.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner did not annex any documents to suggest that the petitioner is the permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand.

8. Learned counsel for the State prays for and is granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit.

9. List this case on 23.04.2026.

10. In the meantime, provisional permanent resident certificate and provisional caste certificate be issued to the petitioner so that she may apply in the upcoming examinations.

11. Interim Relief Application (IA No.1 of 2026) stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 17.03.2026 SK