Back
SANGEETA K. VISHEN
Tilakkumar Vijaykumar Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
Sangeeta K. Vishen, J.
1. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the letter dated 17.10.2023 issued by the respondent no.2, i.e. Mamlatdar. Vide said letter, the Mamlatdar has refused to issue Domicile Certificate, on the sole ground that, the petitioner, for the period from 2013 to 2016, has undertaken his studies in Abu Dhabi.
2. Mr Shivang Thacker, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to page 21 of the captioned writ petition, submitted that the place of birth of the petitioner is New Delhi; the reason for shifting Delhi, was the health of the mother of the petitioner, as she has suffered a paralytic attack; however, the petitioner returned with his parents to Ahmedabad within two months. Since 2006, that is, immediately after the birth on 23.01.2006, the petitioner has been residing at Baroda with his parents, which fact, is strengthened by the passport applied and issued by the passport authority. It indicates the place of issuance, as Ahmedabad and the period is from 02.01.2007 to 01.01.2012. The passport was renewed for the period from 2016 to 2021, similarly, indicating the place of is
Domicile requires indefinite residence, not continuous, and periods of study outside the state do not negate residency for domicile purposes.
Legal provisions for domicile certificate issuance must consider social belongingness and residence, not just birthplace.
Temporary absences for education do not affect the claim for nativity; intention to return is crucial in determining residency.
The court reaffirmed that the rules governing eligibility for education should not unjustly exclude candidates based on residence due to circumstances beyond their control, particularly where a perma....
The insistence on pre-1950 records for caste verification is contrary to established legal principles, particularly the Supreme Court's guidelines.
This case affirms that belonging to a recognized class, established by historical and professional ties, qualifies one for reservation benefits regardless of origin.
The court affirmed that a caste certificate can be cancelled if the claimant fails to prove permanent residency as required by applicable laws and policies.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
