Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Jai Kumar Pillai, J.
Anusuiya Prajapati v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Writ Petitions No. 10277 of 2021, 18396 of 2022, 19690 of 2022, 19986 of 2022, 20187 of 2022 and 4358 of 2023 (Indore); Decided on 12.1.2026
(1) Reservation -- status of women migrating from another State to Madhya Pradesh on marriage -- benefit of reservation can be extended only to those candidates who possess valid domicile certificate of State of Madhya Pradesh -- although petitioners were originally residents of another State, upon their marriage to permanent residents of State of Madhya Pradesh, they are not to be treated as migrants -- for all service and reservation-related purposes, they shall be reckoned as domiciled residents of State of Madhya Pradesh, subject to fulfilment of prescribed statutory requirements. [Para 10]
(2) School Education Service (Teaching Cadre) Service Conditions and Recruitment Rules, 2018 (M. P.) -- reservation -- no clear, specific or express clause stipulating that only candidates who possess caste certificate issued by competent authority of State of Madhya Pradesh would be eligible for appointment -- nor any clause declaring candidates holding caste certificates issued by authorities of other States to be ineligible -- in absence of any express condition of ineligibility, recruiting authority is required to examine whether caste or community to which petitioners belong is recognized as reserved category in both the State from which caste certificate was originally issued and the State of Madhya Pradesh where they have been married -- if it is found that caste or community of petitioners falls under same reserved category in both States then, in absence of any express clause creating any embargo for selection, petitioners cannot be held ineligible merely because caste certificate was issued by another State -- in absence of any express prohibition in Recruitment Rules or advertisement, denial of candidature solely on ground that caste certificate was not issued by competent authority of State of Madhya Pradesh would be arbitrary and unsustainable in law -- caste certificate issued by other State shall, for limited purpose of determining eligibility, be treated as valid for consideration in 2012 (III) MPWN 84 relied on. [Paras 12 to 15, 20 & 21]
(3) Recruitment -- requirement of caste certificate -- conditions of eligibility as prescribed in advertisement are binding upon both candidates and recruiting authority -- must be strictly complied with -- where advertisement specifically mandates submission of caste certificate issued by competent authority of State of Madhya Pradesh and declares candidates holding caste certificates of other States as ineligible, failure to fulfil such condition renders candidates ineligible -- cancellation of candidature cannot be faulted with. (2011) 12 SCC 85 followed. [Para 17]
(4) Recruitment -- requirement of caste certificate -- advertisement does not contain any clear, specific or express stipulation requiring submission of caste certificate issued only by State of Madhya Pradesh -- respondents cannot introduce such condition at later stage -- rules of game cannot be changed after selection process has commenced. (2008) 3 SCC 512 and Civil Appeal No. 2634 of 2013 decided on 7.9.2024 followed. [Para 18]
(5) Reservation -- is a beneficial provision -- must receive liberal and purposive interpretation, so as to advance its object and not defeat it on technical grounds. (2005) 3 SCC 1 and 1992 Supp. (3) SCC 217 = 1992 SCC (L&S) Supp. 1 = (1992) 22 ATC 385 followed. [Para 20]
¼1½ vkj{k.k & fookg gksus ij vU; jkT; ls e/; çns'k esa çokl djus okyh efgykvksa dh çkfLFkfr & vkj{k.k dk Qk;nk mUgha vH;fFkZ;ksa dks fn;k tk ldrk gS ftuds ikl e/; çns'k jkT; dk fof/kekU; vf/kokl çek.ki= gS & ;|fi ;kphx.k ewyr% vU; jkT; dh fuoklh Fkha] rFkkfi e/; çns'k jkT; ds LFkk;h fuokfl;ksa ds lkFk mudk fookg gksus ij mUgsa çoklh ugha ekuk tk,xk & leLr lsok vkSj vkj{k.k&laca/kh ç;kstuksa ds fy, mUgsa] fofgr dkuwuh vis{kkvksa dh iwfrZ ds v/;/khu] e/; çns'k jkT; dk vf/kokflr fuoklh ekuk tk,xkA ¼iSjk 10½
¼2½ jkT; Ldwy f'k{kk lsok ¼'kS{kf.kd laoxZ½ lsok 'krsZ ,oa HkrhZ fu;e] 2018 ¼e-Á-½ & vkj{k.k & ;g vuqcaf/kr djus okyk dksbZ Li"V] fofufnZ"V vFkok vfHkO;ä [kaM ugha fd fu;qfä ds fy, ogh vH;FkhZ ik= gksaxs ftuds ikl e/; çns'k jkT; ds l{ke çkf/kdkjh }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k tkfr çek.ki= gS & u mu vH;fFkZ;ksa dks vik= ?kksf"kr djus okyk dksbZ [kaM gh] ftuds ikl vU; jkT;ksa ds çkf/kdkjhx.k }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k tkfr çek.ki= gS & vik=rk dh fdlh vfHkO;ä 'krZ ds vHkko esa] HkrhZ djus okys çkf/kdkjh ls visf{kr gS fd og iM+rky djs fd ;kphx.k ftl tkfr vFkok leqnk; ds gSa og ml jkT; esa] tgk¡ ls tkfr çek.ki= ewyr% tkjh fd;k x;k] Fkk rFkk e/; çns'k jkT; esa] tgk¡ mudk fookg gqvk gS] nksuksa jkT;ksa esa vkjf{kr oxZ ds :i esa ekU;rk çkIr gS & ;fn ;g ik;k tkrk gS fd ;kphx.k dh tkfr vFkok leqnk; nksuksa jkT;ksa esa ,d gh vkjf{kr oxZ esa vkrs gSa rks] p;u ds fy, vf/kjks/k l`ftr djus okys fdlh vfHkO;ä [kaM ds vHkko esa] ;kphx.k dks ek= blfy, vik= vfHkfu/kkZfjr ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd tkfr çek.ki= fdlh vU; jkT; }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k Fkk & HkrhZ fu;e vFkok foKkiu esa fdlh vfHkO;ä çfr"ks/k ds vHkko esa] ek= bl vk/kkj ij vH;fFkZrk ls oafpr djuk fd tkfr çek.ki= e/; çns'k jkT; ds l{ke çkf/kdkjh }kjk tkjh ugha fd;k x;k Fkk] euekuk vkSj fof/k esa vleFkZuh; gksxk & vU; jkT; }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k tkfr çek.ki=] ik=rk vo/kkfjr djus ds lhfer ç;kstukFkZ] e/; çns'k jkT; esa fopkjkFkZ fof/kekU; ekuk tk,xkA 2012 ¼3½ e-Á- ohDyh uksV~l 84 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 12 ls 15] 20 ,oa 21½
¼3½ HkrhZ & tkfr çek.ki= dh vis{kk & foKkiu esa ;Fkk fofgr ik=rk dh 'krsZ vH;fFkZ;ksa vkSj HkrhZ djus okys çkf/kdkjh] nksuksa ij vkc)dj gSa & vfrfu;efu"Bk ls vuqikyu fd;k tkuk vko';d gS & tgk¡ foKkiu esa e/; çns'k jkT; ds l{ke çkf/kdkjh }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k tkfr çek.ki= is'k djuk fofufnZ"Vr% vkKkfir gS rFkk vU; jkT;ksa ds tkfr çek.ki= okys vH;fFkZ;ksa dks vik= ?kksf"kr fd;k x;k gS] ogk¡ ,slh 'krZ iwjh djus esa vlQyrk ls vH;FkhZ vik= gks tkrs gSa & vH;fFkZrk ds jn~ndj.k esa nks"k ugha fudkyk tk ldrkA ¼2011½ 12 ,llhlh 85 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 17½
¼4½ HkrhZ & tkfr çek.ki= dh vis{kk & foKkiu esa dsoy e/; çns'k jkT; }kjk tkjh fd;k x;k tkfr çek.ki= is'k djus dh vis{kk dk dksbZ Li"V] fofufnZ"V vFkok vfHkO;ä vuqca/k varfoZ"V ugha & çR;FkhZx.k i'pkr~orhZ çØe ij ,slh 'krZ iqj%LFkkfir ugha dj ldrs & p;u çfØ;k vkjaHk gks tkus ds mijkar [ksy ds fu;e ifjofrZr ugha fd, tk ldrsA ¼2008½ 3 ,llhlh 512 rFkk flfoy vihy Øekad 2634 lu~ 2013 fu.khZr fnukad 7-9-2024 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 18½
¼5½ vkj{k.k & Qk;nkçn mica/k gS & mnkj vkSj ç;kstuijd fuoZpu fd;k tkuk vko';d gS rkfd mldk mn~ns'; vxzlj gks] mls rduhdh vk/kkjksa ij foQy ugha djuk pkfg,A ¼2005½ 3 ,llhlh 1 rFkk 1992 lIyh- ¼3½ ,llhlh 217 % 1992 ,llhlh ¼,y ,aM ,l½ lIyh- 1 % ¼1992½ 22 ,Vhlh 385 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 20½
ORDER
1. These writ petitions arising out of various impugned orders passed by the respondent Authorities cancelling the candidatureship of the petitioners in different selection processes for appointment to the post of Uchha Madhyamik Shikshak (different streams).
2. Since common questions of facts and law are involved, all the petitions have been heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that they are residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Prior to marriage, the concerned petitioners were residing in another State and belongs to a reserved class community, for which a valid Other Backward Class (OBC) certificate / SC / ST Caste certificate was issued by the Competent Authority of that State.
4. It is further the case of the petitioners that upon marriage with a permanent resident of the State of Madhya Pradesh, the petitioners shifted her residence and was issued a domicile certificate of the State in accordance with the prevailing Government policy and circulars. After acquiring domicile status, the petitioners claim entitlement to all statutory and constitutional benefits available to members of the said reserved class in the State.
5. It is also the case of the petitioners that the petitioners possess the requisite educational qualifications prescribed under the applicable Recruitment Rules governing the teaching cadre. The Rules, framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, provide for reservation for women candidates and prescribe postgraduation and professional teaching qualifications as essential eligibility criteria.
6. It is further the case of the petitioners that pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Competent Examining Authority, applications were invited for appointment to the post of Uchha Madhyamik Shikshak (different streams). The petitioners applied under the respective SC/ST/OBC category, participated in the selection process, qualified the written examination on merit and was accordingly called for document verification.
7. It is lastly the case of the petitioners that at the stage of document verification, the petitioner’s candidatureship was cancelled without issuance of any show-cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, solely on the ground of non-submission of caste certificate issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh. Resulting in denial of reservation benefits and prompting the filing of the present petition.
8. Per contra, Learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State submits that though the petitioners qualified the High School Teacher Eligibility Test-2018, they failed to produce a valid Domicile/Caste Certificate of Madhya Pradesh at the stage of document verification and had falsely declared herself as a domicile of Madhya Pradesh in the online application. The Tehsildar, after due scrutiny, rightly rejected their applications for caste certificate, against which an alternative statutory remedy of appeal was available but not availed. In absence of a valid OBC/SC/ST Caste Certificate of Madhya Pradesh and in view of the applicable recruitment rules, the petitioners were rightly held ineligible and their candidatureship was lawfully rejected, entitling them no relief or interim relief as claimed.
9. Heard learned counsel for the both parties at length and examined the entire record available before this Court.
10. This Court holds that the benefit of reservation can be extended only to those candidates who possess a valid domicile certificate of the State of Madhya Pradesh. In the present case, although the petitioners were originally residents of another State, upon their marriage to permanent resident of the State of Madhya Pradesh, they are not to be treated as migrants and for all service and reservation-related purposes, they shall be reckoned as domiciled residents of the State of Madhya Pradesh, subject to fulfillment of the prescribed statutory requirements.
11. This Court further no
A married woman must provide a caste certificate based on her father's details to qualify for reservation in public employment, as per the advertisement's requirements.
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.
Validity of OBC certificate, importance of caste certificates bearing the name of the parent, and inapplicability of reservation benefits through marriage
The requirement of a caste certificate bearing the name of the parent to verify the actual caste of the candidate at the time of birth is essential for claiming reservation benefits.
Adherence to specified deadlines and requirements outlined in the advertisement is crucial for the validity of caste certificates and the selection process.
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....
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
