Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.31 seconds)Article 341 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Action Committee On Issue Of Caste ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 18 July, 1994
[6.0] Having heard the learned advocates appearing on
behalf of the respective parties and considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, we are unable to agree with the
contention raised by Shri P.H. Buch, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of the petitioner with regard to the
contention that since the petitioner's caste "Chambhar" is also
notified as Scheduled Caste even in the State of Gujarat, she is
entitled to have the benefit of contesting the election on a
reserved category, though she is of Scheduled Caste from
State of Maharashtra and after marriage she has migrated to
State of Gujarat. Though the contention appears to be
attractive but it runs contrary to the two Constitutional Bench
decisions in the case of Action Committee on Issue of
Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another (Supra)
as also in the case of Marri Chandra Shekar Rao Vs. Dean,
Seth G.S. Medical College and Others reported in (1990)
3 SCC 130.
Sanjeev Kumar Bharti @ Ramanand Yadav & ... vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 4 September, 2017
[6.1] Considering the judgment cited by Shri Krutik
Parikh, learned advocate appearing for the respondents - State
in the case of Sanjeev Kumar and Another (Supra), more
particularly paragraph nos.3 and 4, after referring to the
judgments in the case of Marri Chandra Shekar Rao
(Supra) and Action Committee on Issue of Caste
Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in
the State of Maharashtra and Another (Supra) and the
decision in the case of Melwin Chiras Kujur Vs. State of
Maharashtra reported in (2015) 17 SCC 549 wherein in
paragraph 8 of that judgment it is held that "this Court has
reiterated that the benefits of reservations for the Scheduled
Caste and Schedule Tribe candidates does not enure to the
candidates upon their migration to another State even in a
case where the Caste of those migrated from one State to the
other is recognized as Scheduled Caste /Tribe in both the
States".
Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao vs Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College And Ors on 2 May, 1990
[6.0] Having heard the learned advocates appearing on
behalf of the respective parties and considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, we are unable to agree with the
contention raised by Shri P.H. Buch, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of the petitioner with regard to the
contention that since the petitioner's caste "Chambhar" is also
notified as Scheduled Caste even in the State of Gujarat, she is
entitled to have the benefit of contesting the election on a
reserved category, though she is of Scheduled Caste from
State of Maharashtra and after marriage she has migrated to
State of Gujarat. Though the contention appears to be
attractive but it runs contrary to the two Constitutional Bench
decisions in the case of Action Committee on Issue of
Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another (Supra)
as also in the case of Marri Chandra Shekar Rao Vs. Dean,
Seth G.S. Medical College and Others reported in (1990)
3 SCC 130.
Melwin Chiras Kujur vs State Of Maharashtra on 14 September, 2015
[6.1] Considering the judgment cited by Shri Krutik
Parikh, learned advocate appearing for the respondents - State
in the case of Sanjeev Kumar and Another (Supra), more
particularly paragraph nos.3 and 4, after referring to the
judgments in the case of Marri Chandra Shekar Rao
(Supra) and Action Committee on Issue of Caste
Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in
the State of Maharashtra and Another (Supra) and the
decision in the case of Melwin Chiras Kujur Vs. State of
Maharashtra reported in (2015) 17 SCC 549 wherein in
paragraph 8 of that judgment it is held that "this Court has
reiterated that the benefits of reservations for the Scheduled
Caste and Schedule Tribe candidates does not enure to the
candidates upon their migration to another State even in a
case where the Caste of those migrated from one State to the
other is recognized as Scheduled Caste /Tribe in both the
States".
Bir Singh vs Delhi Jal Board . on 30 August, 2018
The question before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Bir Singh (Supra) formulated for the
consideration is "whether a person belonging to a Scheduled
Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not,
to the benefits or concessions allowed to Scheduled Caste
candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State or
Page 11 of 15
C/SCA/16357/2017 JUDGMENT
Union Territory?". The same has been answered in paragraph
no.34 of the said judgment after considering Articles 341 and
342 of the Constitution of India and the Presidential order
enumerating the list of Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribe for
a particular State /Union Territory. It is concluded in the said
judgment that it will therefore be in consonance with the
constitutional scheme to understand the enabling provisions
under Article 16(4) to be available to provide reservation only
to the classes or categories of Scheduled Caste /Schedule Tribe
enumerated in the Presidential orders for a particular State
/Union Territory within the geographical area of that State and
not beyond.