Validity certificates for backward caste eligibility must consider only parental income, rejecting spousal income based on established legal precedents.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 06-03-2024 which declines issuance of a Validity certificate validating the caste and income certificate already issued, on the score that her husband’s income is beyond the permissible threshold of grant of such certificate.

2. Heard Smt. A.R. Sharadamba, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Spoorthy Hegde, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

The State Government issues a notification calling for applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the posts of Assistant Public Prosecutors through the Directorate of Prosecution and Public Litigation Department. The notification was issued for filling up of 181 posts on 30-09-2019. The petitioner finding herself eligible, applies for the said post and was selected as one of the Assistant Public Prosecutors under the Category 3A in terms of the select list dated 17-01-2023. After the notification of the select list, in terms of the process of selection, the petitioner is said to have uploaded all the documents for verification on the Sevasindhu portal on 25-05-2023 and also submitted all the copies of documents uploaded to the 4^th respondent/Taluk Caste and Income Verification Committee. The 4^th respondent refuses to issue a Validity certificate, but instead sends a communication to the Taluk Backward Caste and Income Verification Officer directing him to visit the house of the petitioner, conduct inspection and submit a report. The said officer, on such visit, submits a report that the husband of the petitioner was working as Lecturer in a private College and reports that the caste and income certificate should be based upon the income of the husband. This report results in denial of issuance of validity certificate to the petitioner.

4. On the denial of issuance of validity certificate, the petitioner began knocking at the doors of several fora of officers bringing to the notice of all those officers that the income of the husband cannot be taken for the purpose of determination and for issuance of caste and income certificate or a validity certificate, as the case would be. It is only the father’s income should be taken note of. At every fora, the petitioner brought to their notice the judgments of the Apex Court and that of this Court contending that it was a settled principle of law. Notwithstanding the judgment of the Apex Court and this Court having been brought to the notice of the Authorities, the Authorities – respondents 2 and 3 passed an order declining to issue validity certificate to the caste and income certificate to the petitioner as coming under Category-3A, on the score that the income of husband of the petitioner was beyond the threshold limit for grant of such certificate. It is at that juncture the petitioner is at the doors of this Court in the subject petition.

5. This Court passed several orders, interim though, on different dates. They read as follows:

“22-04-2024:

This Court has time and again repeated that the State should set its house in order, as they are repeating the very same mistake on every occasion of not issuing a validity certificate on erroneous presumption on law.

Again the petitioner is made to knock at the doors of this Court by the respondent No.2 – Appellate Authority/

Commissioner for Backward Classes.

List this matter on 24.04.2024, in the fresh matters list.

In the event the validity certificate is not issued by then, the respondents will have to pay costs from his/her pocket, as the case would be.

…

24-04-2024:

Learn