Merely holding a bona fide certificate does not grant SC/ST/OBC status in a migratee state if the caste is not recognized there.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Petitioner participated in a selection process for a Scheduled Caste (Unreserved) category post under an advertisement issued by respondent No.2 on 02.03.2020. Her candidature was rejected by the respondents. Feeling aggrieved petitioner has instituted this writ petition.

2. Facts.

2(i). Respondent No.2 issued an advertisement on 02.03.2020 initiating selection process for several categories of posts, including post of Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts). In this category, 62 posts were advertised for candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste (Unreserved) category. Petitioner along with others applied for the post of TGT (Arts) under SC(UR) quota. Her result of written examination was declared in December 2021, wherein she secured 43.50 marks. Petitioner was also called for evaluation of marks. Her total tally of marks came to 47.42. The respondents rejected petitioner’s candidature on the ground that petitioner had not produced the certificate of her belonging to Scheduled Caste category on parental basis. The petitioner produced the caste certificate from her parental side, according to which she belonged to Ramdasia caste, which was recognized as Scheduled Caste in State of Punjab. Petitioner also produced her Bona fide Himachali certificate. The caste certificate produced by the petitioner was not accepted by the respondents and her candidature was rejected.

2(ii). The petitioner feels aggrieved against the rejection of her certificate. Her contention is that she was required to be considered for the posts meant for SC (UR) category. She had scored 47.42 marks in all, which were above 46.95 marks, i.e. the cut-off marks in the said category. With this grievance, petitioner has instituted the writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon Pinki Bagga vs. State of H.P. & Ors., [CWP No.8181 of 2021 decided on 20.04.2022.] and on that basis submitted that in view of Scheduled Tribe certificate produced by the petitioner on parental basis as well as Bona fide Himachali certificate, the action of the respondents in cancelling the candidature of the petitioner as SC (UR) category candidate was not in consonance with the law laid down in aforesaid decision.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.

4(i). In Pinki Bagga’s (supra) case, petitioner’s candidature had been converted from SC (UR) to General category. The petitioner (therein) had grievance against conversion of her candidate from SC (UR) to General category. She was issued a caste certificate to the effect that she belonged to Ramdasia caste recognized as Scheduled Caste in the State of Punjab. Petitioner (therein) had solemnized marriage with a resident of Himachal Pradesh. She was issued a Bona fide Himachali certificate. Scheduled Caste certificate was also issued in her favour certifying that she belonged to Ramdasia caste, considered as Scheduled Caste in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The Hon’ble Division Bench allowed the writ petition filed by Pinki Bagga, placing reliance upon decisions rendered in Naveen Kumari vs. State of H.P. & Others, [CWP No.2651 of 2020 decided on 04.09.2021.]and State of H.P. and Others vs. Smt. Naveen Kumari, [Review Petition No.47 of 2021 decided on 04.09.2021.]. It was observed that in the aforesaid decisions it had been held that ‘when a person is issued a Bona fide Certificate, it means that he/she is a permanent resident of the State for all intents and purposes as he/she has intention to live permanently there and he/she no longer remains a migrant.’ Hon’ble Division Bench further held that ‘a person after her marriage no more remains a migrant and she for all intents and purposes is now settled in the house of her husband.’ Relevant paras from the decision are as under:-

“5. Shri Vikas Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General, while placing reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Ranjana vs. State of Uttrakhand 2019 SCC(15) 664, vehemently a