ORDER

Shukla, J. -- 1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to accept the caste certificate issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer and thereafter to issue appointment order.

2. The facts in short are that the respondent No. 3 M. P. Public Service Commission issued an advertisement to fill up the vacancies of the post of Assistant Professors in Government colleges on the requisition of the respondent No. 1. The petitioner belongs to scheduled caste and is domicile of Madhya Pradesh. He applied for the post. He pleaded that the petitioner passed the written examination as well as the interview and was placed in the select list. However, the appointment order has not been issued to the petitioner on the pretext that the caste certificate was issued by the Tehsildar of State of Uttar Pradesh (U. P.). Thereafter the petitioner also produced caste certificate issued by the authority at Jabalpur but still the respondents have not issued the appointment order.

3. From the pleadings, it is borne out that the petitioner belongs to Chamar caste, which is a scheduled caste. The petitioner has obtained the caste certificate from the State of U. P. to certify that the petitioner belongs to scheduled caste being Chamar and has been shown resident of village and post Kakupur, Tehsil Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar (U. P.). The said certificate was filed along with the form for the post of Assistant Professor published by the M. P. Public Service Commission. The petitioner also filed domicile certificate of the Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner was not considered for the appointment, then he produced the caste certificate issued from the office of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jabalpur.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner is domicile of Madhya Pradesh, therefore, he ought to have been given the benefit of the scheduled caste. He referred clause (vi) of the advertisement in support of his submissions, which reads as under:

^^¼6½ vuqlwfpr tkfr] vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ] efgyk rFkk fu%’kDrtu gsrq vkjf{kr in dsoy e/; Áns’k ds ewyfuoklh vuqlwfpr tkfr] vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ] efgyk rFkk fu%’kDrtu gsrq vkjf{kr gSA NRrhlx<+ lfgr vU; Áns’kksa ds ewyfuoklh ,sls vkosnd tks vius ewyfuokl ds jkT; esa vuqlwfpr tkfr] vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ ds :i esa ekU; gSa rFkk vU; Áns’kksa ds fu%’kDrtu rFkk efgyk vH;FkhZ vkj{k.k gsrq ik= ugha gSaA mUgsa vukjf{kr inksa gsrq fopkfjr fd;k tk;sxkA**

At this stage, it would be appropriate to reproduce clause (vii) of the advertisement also, which reads as under:

^^¼7½ e/; Áns’k ds ckgj ds vuqlwfpr tkfr] vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ ds mEehnokj viuk oxZ vukjf{kr fy[ksA**

5. On reading of the aforesaid clauses, it is manifest that the bona fide residents of the State of M. P. belonging to scheduled caste, scheduled tribe, OBC, women and physically handicapped were to be extended the benefit of the caste as per the advertisement. In clause (vii) it is clearly mentioned that the candidates belonging to scheduled caste, scheduled tribes and OBC of the other State have to be mentioned as unreserved category.

6. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Chamar caste in both States are recognized and therefore, he is entitled for the benefit of the scheduled caste category. The said issue as to whether the person who belongs to scheduled caste notified in one State is entitled to the same status and privilege on his migration to another State has already been considered in para 11 in the case of Hansraj Singh and others v. State of M. P. and others [2013 (1) MPLJ 370], which reads as under :

“11. The aforesaid issue raised by the petitioners stands conclusively decided by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another v. Union of India