SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 13974

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
Bhumika Gajre – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 37925/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

WRIT PETITION NO.37925 of 2025

THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026

Between:

Bhumika Gajre

…Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana and 4 others

…Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“ … to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction

more particularly in nature ofWrit of Mandamus declaring

action of the Respondents in rejecting the caste certificate

application applied for the Education purpose of the

Petitioner with a single line order without mentioning

proper details and not allowing Petitioner to get benefits of

their caste for education purpose is illegal, arbitrary,

unconstitutional and violation of Article 14, 15 and 21A of

the Constitution of and consequently, direct the 3rd and 4th

Respondents to consider the Application of the Petitioner

dt.23.10.2025 and issue Caste Certificate to the Petitioner

for her Education purpose and …..”

2. Heard Mr. B. Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. S. Yogesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare

appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Assistant Government

##PAGE2##

RY,J

W.P_37925_2025

Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.3 and 4. Perused the entire

record.

3. The minor petitioner is pursuing Intermediate in Sri Chaitanya

Junior College, Ameerpet. She submitted an application dated 23.10.2025

to respondent No.3 for issuance of Caste Certificate showing her under

SC category. Said application was rejected by respondent No.4 vide

impugned Endorsement dated 23.10.2025 on the ground that required

documents are not submitted. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ

petition is filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned

endorsement does not contain any reasoning as to the nature of documents

that were not submitted and the reason for rejection of the application.

Further, reliance is placed upon proceedings No.12017/02/2017-SCD

(R.L.Cell), dated 03.10.2019 issued by the Director (Admn.), Government

of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Department of

Social Justice and Empowerment, where a direction was issued to all the

Chief Secretaries of all the State Governments and Union Territory

Administrations to consider the caste status of offspring of

separated/divorced/single women on the basis of caste of their mother as

2

##PAGE3##

RY,J

W.P_37925_2025

per legal ratio laid down in Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika v. State of

Gujarat and others, (2012) 3 SCC 400

5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare

appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 opposed the writ petition stating

that the petitioner has submitted a Memorandum of Understanding dated

04.12.2013 showing settlement between the parents of the petitioner

without any judicial order pursuant to Memorandum of Understanding.

The Memorandum of Understanding only indicates a settlement but not

formal grant of divorce or separation between the parents of the petitioner.

Until such a document is produced, the learned Assistant Government

Pleader states that the case of the petitioner for grant of Caste Certificate

on the basis of mother’s Caste Certificate cannot be considered. To

consider the caste of the petitioner for grant of Caste Certificate under SC

category based on her mother’s certificate, the legal status of mother

being divorced or separated or single has to be demonstrated. In the

instant case, no such documents were produced. Further, the learned

Assistant Government Pleader relied upon the Presidential Order in

Proceeding No.35/1/72-R.U. (SCT-V), where the case of persons who

have migrated from one State to other seeking issuance of Caste

3

##PAGE4##

RY,J

W.P_37925_2025

Certificate was considered. In the instant case, the petitioner’s father is a

resident of State of Karnataka, therefore, the VRO who conducted enquiry

has reported that the petitioner has migrated from the State of Karnataka

to State of Telangana and therefore, she is not entitled to issuance of C

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top