Uma Devi Navaiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2020

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Uma Devi Navaiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2020

Equivalent citations: AIR 2020 MADHYA PRADESH 152, AIRONLINE 2020 MP 477

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

                                        1

     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT AT
                       JABALPUR

Writ Petition No.              23738 of 2018
Parties Name                   Uma Devi Navaiya
                                    Vs.
                               State of Madhya Pradesh and others.
Bench Constituted              Single Bench
Judgment delivered by          Hon'ble Shri Justice Vishal Dhagat.
Whether approved for           Yes/No
reporting
Name of counsel for            For petitioner : Shri T.P. Choudhary,
parties                        Advocate.

                               For respondents-State : Shri            Rohit

Sohgaura, Government Advocate.

Law laid down Significant paragraph numbers (ORDER) 01.05.2020

1. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition being aggrieved by order dated 30.08.2018 passed by Upper Collector Sagar, District Sagar (MP). By the said impugned order, appeal filed by the petitioner against the rejection of his application by S.D.O. for grant of caste certificate has been dismissed.

2. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming relief to quash the order dated 30.08.2018 contained in Annexure P-1 and further to direct the respondent No.2 i.e. Collector Sagar to issue Schedule Caste Certificate of petitioner.

3. Counsel appearing for petitioner has relied on the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in case reported in 2012 Vol. 3 MPWN 84, Alka Singh versus State of MP. In the said case, woman belonging to State of U.P. was married in State of Madhya 2 Pradesh. She belongs to OBC category in UP. After she came to Madhya Pradesh, Jat community has also been declared to be in OBC category in Madhya Pradesh. Considering the same she had filed an application for granting her caste certificate of OBC in Madhya Pradesh. Her application was rejected by the competent authorities. This court held that if a lady due to marriage moves from one State to another after her marriage and her caste in both States is notified as OBC then such lady cannot be treated as migrated persons and she is entitled to get caste certificate of OBC category. Relying on aforesaid judgment, petitioner has made a prayer that impugned order contained in Annexure P-1 be quashed and she may be issued caste certificate.

4. Respondents had filed a reply and it is stated by the respondents that case of petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment reported in (2018) 10 SCC 312, Bir Singh versus Delhi Jal Board and others. In this case, the Supreme Court has categorically held that persons belonging to scheduled caste in one State cannot be deemed to be schedule caste in relation to any other State.

5. It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the respondents that position has been settled and State Government has also issued a circular dated 13.01.2014. Petitioner is required to fulfill the conditions mentioned in clause 4 of said circular. As petitioner does not fulfill the special condition, therefore, there is no error in the order passed by the authority and writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

6. Considered the argument of the counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as respondents and also perused the judgment relied upon by the petitioner and also by the respondents.

7. Learned Apex Court in the matter of Bir Singh (supra) has held that State / UT, benefits or concessions allowed to Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe in matter of employment or education in a particular State or Union Territory is not available to Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe in another State upon his migration to such State. Person belonging to Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe in one State cannot be deemed to be Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe person in State of his migration for purpose of employment or education. Expression in relation to State or Union Territory and for the purpose of Constitution used in Articles 341 and 342 means benefits of reservation stand confined to geographical territory of State or Union Territory, in respect of which list of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe has been notified by presidential orders. As per Article 341 of the Constitution of India, the President after consultation with Governor by public notification specifies the Caste, Races or Tribes or parts of groups within Caste, Races or Tribes which shall for the purposes of this constitution be deemed to be Schedule Castes in relation to that State or Union Territory as the case may be. The notification of President or the Governor is made in respect of a particular Caste to be Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe in a particular geographical area of that State only.

8. Considering the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the matter of Bir Singh (supra) and also after perusing Article 341, it is clear that petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of issuance of Schedule Caste Certificate because notification of President of a particular Caste to be Schedule Caste is for that State only.

9. In view of above, writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed.

(Vishal Dhagat) Judge 4 vkt VINOD KUMAR Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR TIWARI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482002, st=Madhya Pradesh, TIWARI 2.5.4.20=c3a773822dd60058372dba984a8595fa556ca32c1 0ef613cc76f9f59c60d4d85, cn=VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Date: 2020.05.01 14:05:24 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court