Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kalpana Verma vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 19 April, 2023
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023/RJJD/010705] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16173/2018 Kalpana Verma W/o Devendra Kumar Raidas, D/o Rameshwar Verma, Aged About 27 Years, By Caste SC, VPO Sakariya, Dist Pratapgarh (Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Directorate Of Sanskrit, Govt. Of Rajasthan, JLN Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pratapgarh (Raj.)
4. District Education Officer, Pratapgarh (Raj.)
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ambalal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG Mr. Brajesh Purohit JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order 19/04/2023
1. The petitioner (a Scheduled Caste candidate) had applied for the post of Teacher Grade-III level-II, pursuant to recruitment notification No.2/2017-18, dated 05.02.2018.
2. Based on the criteria fixed, petitioner's name reflected in the list of eligible candidates, called for document verification as a TSP-SC candidate published on 04.09.2018. However, while publishing the final select list on 04.10.2018, her candidature as TSP candidate came to be rejected by the respondent, on the ground of her being an original resident of Madhya Pradesh and having migrated to Rajasthan after her marriage. (Downloaded on 21/04/2023 at 09:11:59 PM) [2023/RJJD/010705] (2 of 4) [CW-16173/2018]
3. While submitting that the petitioner has a Scheduled Caste certificate issued in State of Madhya Pradesh and that her husband also has a Scheduled Caste certificate of the State of Rajasthan, learned counsel argued that the petitioner should be considered as a TSP-SC candidate.
4. The issue in question that - "can an aspirant belonging to the reserved category for government service, upon migration to a TSP area in Rajasthan by virtue of marriage to a person of the same category claim caste based TSP reservation benefit in terms of the notification dated 21.10.2019, issued by Governor of Rajasthan?" has already been decided by the order dated 13.01.2021, passed by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18320/2019 : Dashi Devi Damor Vs. State of Rajasthan.
5. The operative part of the aforesaid judgment reads hereinfra:-
"28. The petitioner is by caste 'Damor', which is a caste notified as Scheduled Tribe under the relevant Presidential Order issued for the State of Rajasthan. May be, such caste namely Damor has also been notified to be a Scheduled Tribe by way of separate Presidential notification issued for State of Gujarat. However, for the purpose of considering a person's right to claim reservation in the State as a Scheduled Tribe, the relevant notification issued for the purpose of State of Rajasthan alone has to be taken into account. Since, people of caste Damor of State of Rajasthan alone have been notified to be Scheduled Tribe for the purposes of benefits of reservation in the State of Rajasthan, (Downloaded on 21/04/2023 at 09:11:59 PM) [2023/RJJD/010705] (3 of 4) [CW-16173/2018] persons of Damor caste of the State of Gujarat cannot claim to be a Scheduled Tribe of the State of Rajasthan, so as to stake their claim against the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe.
29. According to the Article 342 of the Constitution and Presidential Order, the castes and classes enumerated in the Order issued for the State of Rajasthan alone are entitled to be appointed against the posts earmarked for Scheduled Tribe.
30. Judgments of Hon'ble The Supreme Court of India in case of Ranjana Kumari Vs. State of Uttarakhand; 2018 (14) SCALE 755; Division Bench Judgment dated 13.08.2019 State of Raj. Vs. Chitra Devi (D.B. Special Appeal (Writs) No.1960/2018); and judgment of this Court in Sushila Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., SB CWP No.824/2020 dated 20.02.2020; are clear on the caste based reservation.
31. It is a settled position of law that a person derives his/her caste from his/her father or a caste of person is to be reckoned according to his/her paternity.
32. Based on the above analysis, it can solely be concluded that petitioner, born to a Damor father, resident of village Kadana, in the State of Gujarat, is a Damor of Gujarat or a Scheduled Tribe of Gujarat. Therefore, she is, obviously, not entitled to be considered as a Scheduled Tribe of the State of Rajasthan.
33. Having examined from all possible angles, this Court does not find any substance/merit in petitioner's contention.
34. The writ petition, therefore, fails."
6. The aforesaid position has also been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 29.04.2022, passed in D.B. (Downloaded on 21/04/2023 at 09:11:59 PM) [2023/RJJD/010705] (4 of 4) [CW-16173/2018] Special Appeal Writ No.277/2021 : Damor Savita Bahen Vs. State of Rajasthan.
7. In view of the aforesaid, it is clear that the petitioner's candidature as a TSP-SC candidate has rightly been rejected.
8. Notwithstanding the above, after her migration to the State of Rajasthan, the petitioner is required to be treated as TSP (General) candidate, by virtue of notification dated 19.10.2021, particularly the clarification 6(ग) inserted with effect from 16.06.2013. Indisputably, petitioner's husband is a bonafide resident of TSP area and she and her husband both are having special bonafide resident certificate issued by the competent authority.
9. Petitioner's name was shown in the list of candidates published on 04.09.2018 as a TSP-SC candidate and her candidature has been rejected as such. There is nothing on record to show that her candidature was considered under the TSP (General) category.
10. The writ petition is thus disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider petitioner's case (who has secured 62.34 marks) in the unreserved category or TSP (General) category. In case she has secured more marks than the last candidate given appointment in TSP (General) category and seat is still vacant, she be given appointment within 8 weeks from today.
11. The stay application also stands dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 2-Ramesh/-
(Downloaded on 21/04/2023 at 09:11:59 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)