The legal principle established in the judgment pertains to the status of a woman belonging to a scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe marrying a person belonging to a forward caste, and the implications of such marriage on her caste status and eligibility for appointment.

1. The present interlocutory application has been filed for amending the writ application in view of the fact that the representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 12.3.2008, passed in WP (S) No. 698 of 2007 has been rejected by the respondent no. 2.

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that due to inadvertence although the order dated 2.7.2009 has been annexed in the writ application but the same could not be challenged. Hence amendment application.

3. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application is allowed.

4. I.A. No. 598 of 2010 will form part of the main writ application.

WP (S) No. 3905 of 2009

5. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order as contained in Memo No. 1253 dated 2.7.2009, whereby and whereunder the representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 12.3.2008, passed in WP (S) No. 698 of 2007 has been rejected by the respondent no. 2. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner either on the basis of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe candidate.

6. The facts emanating from the writ application is that the petitioner was born in scheduled tribe family of Munda caste and caste certificate was also granted to her. Marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with one Dr. Ashok Kumar Das, who belongs to scheduled caste community and on an application being made, the petitioner was granted caste certificate showing her caste as falling within the scheduled caste category.

7. In terms of Advertisement No. 2/04-05 issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, the petitioner having necessary qualification applied on the basis of she being a scheduled caste. The petitioner was declared successful and she was directed to appear in an interview along with all original certificates/documents. After the interview was held, Jharkhand Public Service Commission published provisional result for appointment to the post of Veterinary Doctors and the name of the petitioner also figured in the said list. However, even though the petitioner had supplied the original copy of the certificate and the documents but she did not receive any appointment letter, as a result of which the petitioner moved this Hon'ble Court in WP (S) No. 698 of 2007. This Court had disposed of the said writ application on 12.3.2008 with a liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the Secretary/Animal Husbandry and Fishery Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi, if she has not crossed the age limit and if there is any vacancy in scheduled caste category, which is required to be filled up, the petitioner's case will be considered in that category and order will be passed in accordance with law. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, a reasoned order was passed by respondent no. 2 as contained in Memo No. 1253 dated 2.7.2009, whereby the claim of the petitioner for being treated as scheduled caste candidate was rejected.

8. Heard Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learned Senior S.C. 1, for the respondents.

9. Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner has solemnized marriage with one Dr. Ashok Kumar Das, who belongs to scheduled caste community and therefore her caste got transferred and merged to that of her husband and this fact has not been considered by the respondent no.2 while issuing the impugned order dated 2.7.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment rendered in the case of Mrs. Val Samma Paul vs. Cochin University, (1996) 3 SCC 545 and has submitted that the petitioner by dint of his marriage to a member of scheduled caste community is claiming appointment and therefore her claim for appointment should not have been rejected by the authority on her being a scheduled caste candidate.

10. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learn