2009 Supreme(Kar) 865

High Court of Karnataka
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRA REDDY
Kalavathi S. Nergi
Versus
The District Commissioner, Udupi & Others
Writ Appeal No. 392 of 2009 (GM-CC) connected with Writ Appeal No. 2050 of 2008 (GM-CC)
Decided on : 04-12-2009

Headnote:CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Articles 226 & 227: [P.D.Dinakaran, CJ & Anand Byrareddy,J] Appellant married to a person who belonged to the Adi Dravida Community, which is a Scheduled Caste -Appellant sought for Caste Certificate claiming that she belong to the caste of her husband - Grant of Caste Certificate -Appellant secured employment in New India Assurance Company - Subsequent termination of the appellant’s Scheduled Caste status by the District Caste Verification Committee - Challenge as to -Finding of the Single Judge that the appellant had not committed any fraud and claimed the caste status of her husband by virtue of her marriage with him - Subsequent tendering of resignation by the appellant - Position of law - Whether the appellant/employee could seek the benefit available to a Scheduled Caste candidate on the basis of her marriage to a person of that community - Held, The appellant/employee having made an application for employment in the belief that she was entitled to claim the status of a Scheduled Caste community on account of her marriage to a person from that community was therefore legal and tenable and in line with the law of the land at the relevant point time. Further, the legal position was upset only in the year 1996. In the meanwhile, the appellant/employee’s community by birth also having been notified as one of the other backward classes, entitled to benefits, the appellant could continue to claim the benefit of reservation. This aspect of the matter, is overlooked in the case of the appellant/employee in the earlier proceedings as well as before the Single Judge. Hence, the appellant’s employment on the basis of her caste certificate cannot be held to be illegal or irregular. The appellant/employee also having been conferred the benefit as a person belonging to a notified other backward class, would have the benefit to claim under that category even if, at a later point of time, the change in the legal position as to a wife not being able to claim the status of the community to which her husband belonged is declared. On facts held, Having regard to the ratio of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs Reshma Ramesh Meher & anr., 2008(4) LLN 127, the appellant would be entitled to claim the benefit of belonging to a notified backward class notwithstanding the declaration of law, when she was no longer entitled to claim benefit available to the Scheduled Caste community on the basis of her marital status. Order of dismissal from service was set aside. Direction issued to reinstate the appellant in service with all consequential benefits and continue her till superannuation.

       LABOUR & SERVICES - Caste Certificate: [P.D.Dinakaran, CJ & Anand Byrareddy,J] Benefit of Reservation - Appellant married to a person who belonged to the Adi Dravida Community, which is a Scheduled Caste -Appellant sought for Caste Certificate claiming that she belong to the caste of her husband - Grant of Caste Certificate -Appellant secured employment in New India Assurance Company - Subsequent termination of the appellant’s Scheduled Caste status by the District Caste Verification Committee - Challenge as to -Finding of the Single Judge that the appellant had not committed any fraud and claimed the caste status of her husband by virtue of her marriage with him - Subsequent tendering of resignation by the appellant - Position of law - Whether the appellant/employee could seek the benefit available to a Scheduled Caste candidate on the basis of her marriage to a person of that community - Held, The appellant/employee having made an application for employment in the belief that she was entitled to claim the status of a Scheduled Caste community on account of her marriage to a person from that community was therefore legal and tenable and in line with the law of the land at the relevant point time. Further, the legal position was upset only in the year 1996. In the meanwhile, the appellant/employee’s community by birth also having been notified as one of the other backward classes, entitled to benefits, the appellant could continue to claim the benefit of reservation. This aspect of the matter, is overlooked in the case of the appellant/employee in the earlier proceedings as well as before the Single Judge. Hence, the appellant’s employment on the basis of her caste certificate cannot be held to be illegal or irregular. The appellant/employee also having been conferred the benefit as a person belonging to a notified other backward class, would have the benefit to claim under that category even if, at a later point of time, the change in the legal position as to a wife not being able to claim the status of the community to which her husband belonged is declared. On facts held, Having regard to the ratio of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs Reshma Ramesh Meher & anr., 2008(4) LLN 127, the appellant would be entitled to claim the benefit of belonging to a notified backward class notwithstanding the declaration of law, when she was no longer entitled to claim benefit available to the Scheduled Caste community on the basis of her marital status. Order of dismissal from service was set aside. Direction issued to reinstate the appellant in service with all consequential benefits and continue her till superannuation.