Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Laxmi Hasda W/o Chandan Hasda – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. The prayer in this petition has been made for quashing of the order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Singhbhum (Kolhan) Division, Chaibasa (Respondent no. 3) in Election Petition No. 04 of 2022 whereby the Divisional Commissioner has allowed the petition of respondent no. 5 in part and has come to the conclusion that the petitioner is not eligible to contest the election to the post of Member-XXII West Singhbhum/04, Zila Parishad, Chakradharpur (Part-I), West Singhbhum in Panchayat Election, 2022 as a member of scheduled tribe which is reserved for scheduled tribe women. Further the prayer has been made to allow the petitioner to continue and hold the post of Member of Zila Parishad.
3. Mr. Arshad Hussain, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed her nomination as a candidate of election to the post of Member XXII West Singhbhum/04, Zila Parishad, Chakradharpur (Part-I) West Singhbhum in Panchayat Election, 2022 before the
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.
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.
Point of Law : The object of Articles 341(1) and 342(1) of the Constitution is to provide additional protection to the members of the SC/ST having regard to the social and economical backwardness fro....
Point of Law : Petitioner is married in the State of Himachal Pradesh to a person belonging to OBC and even the Caste to which the petitioner belonged in the State of her origin has been declared as ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a person migrating from one state to another does not carry their caste status to the migrating state, even if the same caste is recognized as....
The insistence on pre-1950 records for caste verification is contrary to established legal principles, particularly the Supreme Court's guidelines.
Reservation benefits are confined to the natives of a state, and individuals migrating from other states cannot claim such benefits based on their caste status in their home state.
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
