Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Sunil Kumar Paswan, son of Shri Parmeshwar Paswan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P.(C) No.3734 of 2019
Decided on : 08-04-2021
Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 - Section 18 - Jharkhand Municipality Elected Representative (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2020 - Rule 3.16 - Cancel caste certificate - Issuance of caste certificate - Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing order issued by Caste Scrutiny Committee - Further prayer is made for quashing order as well as order and for quashing memo and whereby respondent has cancelled caste certificate - Further prayer made is for quashing letter whereby Municipal Corporation was directed to send recommendation that petitioner is ineligible to hold post of Mayor and further it has been stated that petitioner is ineligible Rule Jharkhand Municipality Elected Representative Discipline and Appeal Rules - Quashing of letter has also been prayed whereby in reference to letter Municipal Corporation has sent recommendation – Held, therefore that arises in this cases whether petitioner can claim benefit of being Scheduled Tribe in State of Maharashtra though he had as he states Scheduled Tribe certificate in State of Andhra Pradesh Inasmuch as we are not concerned in this application with controversy as to whether petitioner correctly or appropriately belongs to Gouda community or not or whether petitioner had proper certificate it is desirable to confine controversy basic question namely whether one who is recognized as Scheduled Tribe in State of his origin and birth continues to have benefits or privileges or rights in state of migration or where he later goes - In paragraph Honble Supreme Court in case of Chandra - Medical College reported in supra answered same and held that petitioner of that case was not entitled to be admitted medical college on basis of scheduled caste certificate in Maharashtra - Judgments relied by counsel for respondent State are on same line and Full Bench of this Court has also answered this aspect of matter in case - State of Jharkhand and Others & Analogous cases supra - Petitioner was required to produce document of his father as admittedly father of petitioner was of origin Village in District of Bihar and in light of this decision on migration petitioner is not entitled for benefit in State of Jharkhand - Petitioner has challenged letter and has also filed appeal against order of disqualification to hold post of Mayor before appellate authority which is dismissed and same is not under challenge in this writ petition petitioner is invoking two parallel proceedings for disqualification and in light above discussion and judgments no relief can be extended to petitioner and accordingly writ petition is here by dismissed – Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Binod Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned A.A.G.-II appearing on behalf of the respondent State.
2. This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 31.05.2019 issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The further prayer is made for quashing the order dated 17.08.2019 as well as the order dated 17.08.2020 and for quashing the memo no.2290 dated 17.08.2019 and whereby the respondent no.9 has cancelled the caste certificate No.JHCC/2018/21640 dated 17.03.2018. The further prayer made is for quashing letter dated 14.08.2020 whereby the Municipal Corporation was directed to send the recommendation that the petitioner is ineligible to hold the post of Mayor and further it has been stated that the petitioner is ineligible under Rule 3.16 of Jharkhand Municipality Elected Representative (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2020. Quashing of letter dated 17.08.2020 has also been prayed whereby in reference to letter No.2026 dated 14.08.2020 the Municipal Corporation has sent the recommendation. The letter dated 28.08.2020 has also been sought to be quashed issued to the petitioner under Rule 3.16 of the Jharkhand Municipality Elected Representative (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2020.
4. The petitioner is stated to be local resident of district Giridih has been residing there since his childhood and has also completed his education from primary school to B.A.(Part-II) from the district of Giridih. The local resident certificate as well as the caste certificate have been issued by the competent authority, Giridih district administration on different dates and before the existence of the State of Jharkhand. The Government of Jharkhand has framed the local resident policy by Resolution dated 18.04.2016. The father of the petitioner was in service of the erstwhile State of Bihar (undivided). He was working as a Manager in the Vyapar Mandal Division in the district of Giridih and he remained posted in Giridih since 1985 to till his retirement in the year 2000. For the first time, the caste certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner for the purpose of taking admission under the reserved category (scheduled caste) and on the basis of the same scholarship was also given to the petitioner. The petitioner, having inclination towards social service and political field and as such he wanted to contest the election for the post of Mayor in Sirsiya Panchayat within the district of Giridih. He made an application for issuance of caste certificate in his favour which was issued in favour of the petitioner vide Caste Certificate No.6323 dated 23.10.2010 by the Block Development Officer, Giridih. The post of Mukhiya in Sirsiya panchayat was reserved for woman category and the petitioner was unable to contest the election. Later on the Sirsiya panchayat became the part of Giridih Municipal Corporation when the Giridih Municipality was notified as Giridih Municipal Corporation. The further caste certificate was required to be submitted for contesting election and for that the petitioner got issued the fresh caste certificate for filing his nomination and the petitioner filed the same and got elected for the post of Mayor for that Municipal Corporation. While the petitioner was elected and thereafter the caste certificate of the petitioner was cancelled. Aggrieved with this, the petitioner has filed this writ petition and subsequently, the other developments, and that is why, the petitioner has challenged the other orders also in the writ petition.
5. Mr. Binod Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondent authority issued
Reservation benefits are strictly confined to the State for which the caste is notified, and cannot be claimed across State lines based on marriage or migration.
The original caste status of an individual in the original state is to be reckoned for providing the benefit of reservation, and they are not entitled to the same benefit upon migrating to another st....
Caste status is determined by the state of origin, and individuals migrating to another state cannot claim benefits of reservation in the new state.
Migrants cannot claim reservation benefits in a new state based on their original state's caste status, as established by Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.
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
