Meena Kumari Mardi …. … v. The State of Jharkhand The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 984 of 2019 Meena Kumari Mardi …. …. Petitioner 1. 2. 3. 4. Versus The State of Jharkhand The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. The Director, Secondary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi. … … Respondents
Legal Reasoning
benefits of reservation to the petitioner. It is well settled law that benefit of reservation can only be extended to the permanent resident of the State and 3 resident of other States cannot be granted benefits of reservation in the migrated State. The petitioner is a resident of State of Orissa and after marriage in same community, she has obtained Caste Certificate issued by the SDO, East Singhbhum. The respondent-State has also issued a Circular that a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe person, who has migrated from the State of origin to the other State for the purpose of seeking education, employment etc. will be deemed to be a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe of the State of his origin and will be entitled to derive the benefits from the State of origin and not from the State to which she has migrated. 6. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that the petitioner produced a caste certificate on the date of verification, showing that she is wife of a gentleman residing at Dhalbhum in the district of East Singhbhum and that, she belongs to ‘Munda, community which is a Scheduled Tribe of the State. There is no dispute that the petitioner is daughter of a person, who belongs to Munda caste and also there is no dispute that she belongs to the said caste. The petitioner has migrated to the State of Jharkhand after having married a resident of this State. Law is well settled that the right of a Scheduled Tribe is created on the date he or she is born. Since that right is affixed with the birth of the person, the same is affixed with the State in which such right has accrued. The petitioner, therefore, as a member of Scheduled Tribe Community, acquired rights applicable to members of the Scheduled Tribe Community of the State of Odisha and simultaneously with her birth in State of Odisha. The moment, she migrated to the State of Jharkhand, whether on being married or otherwise, she did not bring with her the right that she acquired in the State of Odisha. So far as the State of Jharkhand is concerned, she never acquired any such right. 7. The issue fell for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Ranjana Kumari Vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors., reported in (2019) 15 SCC 664, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that ‘merely because in the migrant State the same caste is recognized as Scheduled Caste, the migrant cannot be recognized as Scheduled caste of the migrant State’. 4 8. Further, exactly the same and similar issue fell before this Court in the case of Kumari Arti Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. in W.P.(S) No. 6031 of 2019, wherein, this Court after considering the ratio laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ranjana Kumari (supra) has been
Arguments
------ CORAM : HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK ------ : Mr. Arun Kumar Dubey, Advocate : Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, SC-VII : Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, Advocate ------ For the Petitioner For the Resp.-State For the Resp. No. 4 7/ 10.07.2023 The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the decision dated 11.12.2018 (Annexure-8) taken by Establishment Committee, whereby his appointment on the post of Post Graduate Trained Teacher has been rejected on the ground that she originally belongs to State of Odisha. Petitioner has also prayed for a direction upon the respondents to issue appointment letter after quashment of notice dated 22.12.2018, whereby the petitioner has been denied for appointment. 2. An Advertisement No.10/2017 was floated by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission for appointment to the post of Post Graduate Trained Teacher in different subjects in Govt. +2 Schools. The petitioner fulfilling all the eligibility criteria, applied for such appointment in Sanskrit subject under Scheduled Tribe Category. It is the case of petitioner that the petitioner was issued Caste Certificate on 11.10.2017 by the Office of Sub Divisional Officer, East Singhbhum, declaring her to be a member of Scheduled Tribe for the State of Jharkhand. Thereafter, admit card was issued under the Scheduled Tribe category and she appeared in the written test, in which she was declared successful for the Sanskrit subject and she was directed to appear on 27.10.2018 for verification of the original certificates. Pursuant to the same, she appeared on the date specified for verification of the testimonial. Thereafter, a meeting of State Level Establishment Committee under the chairmanship of Director, Secondary 2 Education, Jharkhand, was held on 5.12.2018, whereby, it has been decided to reject the candidature for appointment of the petitioner, as she originally belongs to Odisha State and hence, the caste certificate issues by the State of Jharkhand is not in accordance with rule and the same was communicated vide memo no. 4589 dated 11.12.2018. Thereafter, by the impugned notice dated 22.12.2018, it has been informed that her appointment has been rejected. Having no efficacious and alternative remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondents in confining the case of the petitioner under Unreserved Category without considering the Caste Certificate issued by the Competent Authority of State of Jharkhand is totally illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional in the eyes of law. He further submits that the respondents are duty bound to act in a proper and fair manner in determining the caste / category of petitioner and to accept her candidature under S.T. category and to extend the benefit of reservation. He further submits that the petitioner is permanently residing in the State of Jharkhand after marriage and since she belongs to Scheduled Tribe in the State of Jharkhand as well as in the State of Odisha, the respondents ought to have been considered the case of the petitioner for appointment to the said post after giving the benefit of reservation under ST Category. 4. Per contra, counter-affidavits have been filed by the Respondent State as well as Respondent-JSSC. 5. Mr. Sanjoy Piprawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-JSSC and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State jointly submits that since the petitioner failed to submit valid caste certificate, the benefit of reservation was not extended to her and her candidature was considered under Unreserved Category. The petitioner has secured less marks than the marks obtained by the last successful candidate in unreserved category and as such, she was not declared successful. They further submit that caste certificate issued by the SDO, East Singhbhum, State of Jharkhand is also not valid for extending the
Decision
pleased to dismiss the writ petition of that petitioner. 9. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid rules, guidelines and judicial pronouncement, there is no scope of interference with the decision of the respondent-JSSC as well as Respondent-State in treating the candidature of the petitioner as unserved category for the said post on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit a valid caste certificate for extending the benefits of reservation in the State of Jharkhand in terms of the Advertisement. 10. costs. R.Kr. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No order as to (Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)