Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH
Shibin Sai A. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner’s claim of denial based on residency and caste. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner, who has passed SSLC and ITI (Fitter), seeks to quash Ext.P3 notification issued by the Kerala Public Enterprises (Selection and Recruitment) Board for selection to the post of Operator in Keltron Component Complex Limited.
3. The petitioner states that appointment letters were issued to four selected candidates. The petitioner was not appointed. The petitioner states that out of the four candidates, who were appointed, two opted other Branches and only the other two joined service. Therefore, there are two posts lying vacant. The petitioner was not given appointment letter holding that he is a resident of Mahe within the Union Territory of Puduchery.
5. The petitioner states that he is a resident of Kuthuparamba Municipality of Kannur District and he cannot be denied appointment to the post of Operator (Fitter). Denial of appointment to the petitioner would offend the fundamental right of the petitioner under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
7. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Marri Chandra
Denial of employment benefits solely based on temporary residency infringes upon fundamental rights guaranteed under 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.
The court affirmed that benefits of caste-based reservations are non-portable across states; migrants must claim such benefits in their state of origin only, emphasizing socio-legal contextualization....
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 ....
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.
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.
Caste status is determined by the state of origin, and individuals migrating to another state cannot claim benefits of reservation in the new 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
