Back
2019 Supreme(Raj) 120
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Reena and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3531, 766, 1377, 1473, 3651, 4672 and 5131 of 2019
Decided On : 22-04-2019
For the Appellant : Himmat Jagga, Moti Singh, B.S. Sandhu, T.C. Sharma and Harshvardhan Singh
For the Respondent: Sunil Beniwal, AAG and Kunal Upadhyay
A person belonging to a reserved category in one State is not entitled to reservation in the same category in another State upon migration due to marriage or other reasons.
Headnote:
OBC - MIGRATION - PRESIDENTIAL ORDER - RESERVATION - MARRIAGE: The benefit of reservation to migrants from other States cannot be given as it is barred by the binding precedent law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to the OBC category in Haryana, married a person from the OBC category in Rajasthan and migrated to Rajasthan. She sought an OBC caste certificate in Rajasthan, claiming that she deserved reservation in Rajasthan based on her OBC status in Haryana.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that a person recognized as a member of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in their original State is entitled to reservation benefits only in that State and not in other States/Union Territories upon migration.
Issues: 1. Whether a person belonging to a reserved category in one State is entitled to reservation in the same category in another State upon migration due to marriage? 2. Whether the Presidential Order specifying Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for a particular State applies to migrants from other States?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on several Supreme Court judgments, including Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao v. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College, Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra v. Union of India, and Bir Singh v. Delhi Jal Board, which held that reservation benefits are limited to the State in which a person is recognized as belonging to a reserved category. 2. The court held that the Presidential Order specifying Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for a particular State does not apply to migrants from other States, and that extending reservation benefits to migrants would be against the constitutional scheme and the law laid down by the Supreme Court.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to OBC reservation in Rajasthan based on her OBC status in Haryana. The court suggested that the petitioner could approach the National Commission for Backward Classes to seek a recommendation to the Union Government and/or State Governments for a mechanism to address such cases.
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
1. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the controversy involved in these writ petitions is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5521/2019 (Saroj Kumari. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided today itself i.e. 22.4.2019. The said judgment reads as follow:-
"1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition claiming the following relief:-
"It is, therefore, prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and:-
(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the verbal refusal of the respondent Tehsildar Tibbi, District Hanumangarh from issuing the OBC caste certificate may kindly be declared illegal and arbitrary;
(ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent Tehsildar Tibbi, District Hanumangarh may kindly be directed to issue OBC caste certificate to the petitioner forthwith;"
2.1 The petitioner belongs to the State of Haryana and she falls in O.B.C. category. Her husband belongs to OBC category of State of Rajasthan. After marriage, the petitioner claims that as she undisputedly belongs to OBC category in State of Haryana and her husband also belongs to OBC category in State of Rajasthan, therefore, she deserves to be given OBC reservation in Rajasthan.
2.2 The broad question of law under consideration is as to whether any reserved category candidate of one State would be entitled for reservation in the same reserved category in another State on account of migration upon marriage, adoption, conversion etc.
3.1 Learned AAG while addressing the broad legal proposition submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court has repeatedly reiterated the law that a reserved category candidate would not be entitled for the same reservation once he/she migrates from his original State on count of marriage, adoption or conversion. Learned AAG has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao. vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College and others, reported in (1990) 3 SCC 130, the relevant para 10 whereof reads as below:-
"10. It has, however, to be borne in mind that a man does not cease to belong to his caste by migration to a better or more socially free and liberal atmosphere. But if sufficiently long time is spent in socially advanced area then the inhibitions and handicaps suffered by belonging to a socially disadvantageous community do not continue and the natural talent of a man or a woman or a boy or girl gets full scope to flourish. These, however, are problems of social adjustment i.e. how far protection has to be given to a certain segment of socially disadvantaged community and for how long to become equal with others is a matter of delicate social adjustment. These must be so balanced in the mosaic of the country's integrity that no section or community should cause detriment or discontentment to other community or part of community or section. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes belonging to a particular area of the country must be given protection so long as and to the extent they are entitled in order to become equal with others. But equally those who go to other areas should also ensure that they make way for the disadvantaged and disabled of that part of the community who suffer from inabilities in those areas. In other words, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes say of Andhra Pradesh do require necessary protection as balanced between other communities. But equally the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes say of Maharashtra in the instant case, do require protection in the State of Maharashtra, which will have to be in balance to other communities. This must be the basic approach to the problem. If one bears this basic approach in mind, then the determination of the controversy in the instant case does not become difficult. For the purpose of understanding the problem, it may be worthwhile to refer to the Report of the Joint Committee of the Parliament on the Scheduled Castes and
