1987 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 2
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
, J
Shrivas Rajeshkumar Satyanarayan v. Chairman Selection Committee and Others
Spl. C. Appln. No. 31 of 1986
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M.A. Malik
For the Respondents: N/A
This case affirms that belonging to a recognized class, established by historical and professional ties, qualifies one for reservation benefits regardless of origin.
Headnote:The petitioner contested the denial of admission under the reserved S.E.B. Class quota, invoking laws under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India, supported by documentation from the Social Welfare Officer. The court found that the petitioner’s family belongs to the Nayi community, recognized as S.E.B. Class, affording him eligibility for the reserved admission. The court ruled that the petitioner was entitled to benefits under Government Resolution of 1978 for his admission.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner applies for admission under s.e.b. quota. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. history of family ties to s.e.b. class presented. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. government resolution favors s.e.b. class admissions. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 4. domicile affects eligibility for admission. (Para 7 , 11) |
| 5. final ruling enables petitioner's admission. (Para 14 , 15) |
1. The petitioner who has passed the Higher Secondary Examination (Standard XII) with Science Stream in the month of March 1985 has filed this petition and prayed for a writ and/or direction or order directing the respondents to give admission to the petitioner for Instrumentation and Control Branch in the reserved quota reserved for Socially and Educationally Backward Class (hereinafter referred to as 'S.E.B. Class'). The petition has been subsequently amended and a further prayer has been made for a writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the order dt. 23-1-1986 (Annexure 'h') whereby respondent No. 3 has held that the petitioner did not belong to S.E.B. Class and, therefore, cancelled the certificate (Annexure 'a') issued by the Social Welfare Officer, Ahmedabad District.
2. There is no dispute that if the petitioner is found to belong to the S.E.B. Class, he will get admission in the reserved quota for Instrumentation and Control Course at Bhavnagar for which he has shown his first preference. The question that arises for my consideration, therefore, is whether the benefit of S.E.B. Class/caste is available to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. In order to decide this issue, it is necessary to reproduce short facts. The petitioner has averred that he belongs to Hindu Nai Community which is recognised as S.E.B. Class by the Baxi Commission. On the aforesaid basis the petitioner applied for admission in the Instrumentation and Control Branch of Engineering on 17-1-1985 and has produced along with his admission application a Certificate dt. 16-1-1986 (Annexure 'A') issued by the Social Welfare Officer, Ahmedabad District, to the effect that petitioner Shri Rajendrakumar, son of Shrinivas Satyanarayan, belongs to S.E.B. Class. The petitioner was called for interview on 27-12-1985. According to the petitioner, he was given merit number for various groups mentioned in paragraph 3 of the petition. He has further averred that after the interview he was given admission in the Instrumentation and Control Branch in Bhavnagar College in the reserved quota of 10 per cent. Thereafter, when he went to pay his fees, respondent No. 1 told him that he belongs to Uttar Pradesh and, therefore, he is not entitled to get admission in the reserved quota for the Instrumentation and Control Course and, therefore, he was required to clarify the position and his admission was kept pending. Ultimately the petitioner tried to approach the concerned authorities, but could not succeed and, therefore, he has filed this petition.
4. During the pendency of this petition, by an order dt. 23-1-1986 (Annexure 'H') the Director of Social Welfare Department (respondent No. 3) has cancelled the certificate (Annexure 'A') granted to the petitioner by the Social Welfare Officer. Thereafter the petition was amended and certain facts were brought on record, by the petitioner. In the amendment, the petitioner has contended that at entry No. 76 of Annexure 'I' to the Resolution dt. 1-1-1978 (Annexure 'I' to the petition) a class of persons, either Hindus or Muslims, having traditional business of hair cutting, have been accepted by the Bakshi Commission as belonging to S.E.B. Class/caste. The history of the petitioner's family, as disclosed in the petition, is that since 1928 to 1934 Lalbahadur (grand father of the present petitioner) and his (Lalbahadur's) father Mathuraprasad were residing and performing their traditional business of Nayi in Ahmedabad. Mathuraprasad died in year 1935 in U. P. and thereafter Lalbahadur came permanently to reside in Ahmedabad with his family in year 1940, and s