Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Rajasthan vs Sunita on 27 January, 2020
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Vineet Saran
ITEM NO.17+48 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Item No.17:
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 910/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18-09-2018
in DBSAW No. 1117/2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur)
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SUNITA Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.10197/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.10199/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
With
Item No.48:
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 911/2020
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.10302/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.10304/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 27-01-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ashish Kumar,AAG
Ms. Sangeeta Bharti,Adv.
Mr. Shakti Verma,Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
There is firstly an inordinate delay in preferring these petitions which is completely unexplained and it is time Signature Not Verified that the the Legal Department of the State Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2020.01.29 17:09:36 IST Reason: Government puts their house in order. Even turning to the merits of the case, learned counsel for the 1 petitioners has drawn our attention to the Caste Certificate Guidelines dated 9th September, 2015 to contend that the benefit is available to the progeny of the migrant who takes residence in the State and marries a resident of the State.
We find aforesaid is however for education and employment. The impugned order makes a distinction between such benefits and other benefits as is apparent from paragraph 5 of the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the caste certificates are issued only in one format online. We are of the view that the it is always possible for the State to device more than one format making a distinction for the purpose it can be used.
We accordingly dismiss these petitions both on the grounds of limitation and merits but with the aforesaid clarification.
Pending applications shall also stand disposed of.
(ANITA MALHOTRA) (ANITA RANI AHUJA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
2