Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 326 (RAJ)

Indra Devi v. State of Rajasthan

2020-02-05

ARUN BHANSALI

body2020
ORDER : Arun Bhansali, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against non-acceptance of her application for issuance of caste certificate as OBC belonging to Khati community by the Tehsildar (Revenue), Bhadra, District Hanumangarh. 2. It is, inter-alia, indicated in the writ petition that though the petitioner was born in the State of Haryana, on account of her marriage within the State of Rajasthan, the petitioner is residing with her husband and is a permanent resident of this State. 3. Submissions have been made that Khati community is indicated as OBC in the State of Haryana as well as State of Rajasthan, however, when the petitioner attempted to apply for issuance of caste certificate, her application has not been received by the Tehsildar saying that she should get the certificate issued from her parental place i.e. State of Haryana. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in Manju Yadav v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3968/2017, decided on 29.11.2017 at Jaipur Bench, wherein in similar nature circumstance for issuance of OBC certificate, following directions were issued:- "In any case, present writ petitions are disposed of with following directions, as agreed- 1. The circular dated 8.4.1994, issued by Central Government is made applicable in the present cases also, however, OBC certificate would be issued by the State authorities only after getting verification of father's income and caste from the State from where a candidate has migrated. The required verification would be sought by the SDO to whom application is submitted by the candidate. In case, verification is sought, the prescribed authority of the State of Haryana would send it not only indicating the category in which the candidate falls i.e. whether OBC or any other category in their State and the income of the candidate's father as to whether he is falling in creamy layer or not. The assessment of the creamy layer would be in reference to what is prevalent in the State of Haryana. It would be after proper verification and giving details. Accordingly, all the authorities in the State of Haryana, impleaded as party respondents in majority of writ petitions, would comply the direction aforesaid in consonance to the circular dated 8.4.1994. 2. The assessment of the creamy layer would be in reference to what is prevalent in the State of Haryana. It would be after proper verification and giving details. Accordingly, all the authorities in the State of Haryana, impleaded as party respondents in majority of writ petitions, would comply the direction aforesaid in consonance to the circular dated 8.4.1994. 2. On receipt of verification from the prescribed authority of the State of Haryana, competent authority in the State of Rajasthan would appropriately issue OBC certificate indicating whether the candidate is falling in the creamy layer or not. The said certificate would be issued only if the petitioner was an OBC candidate in the State of Haryana and is falling in the same category in the State of Rajasthan and not otherwise. The direction aforesaid would resolve the grievance in regard to issuance of OBC certificate. The compliance of this order would be made by the parties in the State of Rajasthan as well as State of Haryana in consonance to the circular issued by the Government of India dated 8.4.1994. 3. The competent authority in the State of Rajasthan would take steps for issuance of caste certificate at the earliest. 4. The issuance of caste certificate/certificate for taking benefit of reservation would remain subject to final outcome of the judgment of the Apex Court. If it goes against then petitioner/s, would not be entitled to get benefits of reservation. 5. It is also submitted that the appeal against the said order being D.B. Special Appeal (W) No. 1116/2018 : State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Smt. Manju Yadav, decided on 18.09.2018, the Division Bench specifically observed as under:- "2. The issue of benefit of reservation is distinct from the entitlement of a person to apply for grant of an OBC/ST/SC certificate. 3. In view of the Constitution Bench judgment delivered by the Supreme Court on 30/08/2018 in CA No. 1085/2013 : Bir Singh Vs. Delhi Jal Board & Ors. and connected appeals, the issue of public employment has attained finality. A member of a Scheduled Caste or Schedule Tribe or OBC in a particular State cannot avail benefit of reservation in another State. Issue of benefit in Union Territories decided by the Constitution Bench is irrelevant for public employment in the State of Rajasthan. 4. and connected appeals, the issue of public employment has attained finality. A member of a Scheduled Caste or Schedule Tribe or OBC in a particular State cannot avail benefit of reservation in another State. Issue of benefit in Union Territories decided by the Constitution Bench is irrelevant for public employment in the State of Rajasthan. 4. Females outside the State of Rajasthan on migrating to Rajasthan, post marriage may not be entitled to the benefit of reservation in public employment in the State of Rajasthan on account of being a member of a SC or ST or OBC in another State. 5. But these ladies would certainly be entitled to be issued a SC or ST or OBC certificate. For the reason, apart from reservation in public employment these certificates may be relevant for grant of some benefit. For example, it may be a housing scheme. A migrant lady may claim benefit on the strength of the certificate if the scheme envisages domicile or residence as the entitlement for a house or a flat with reservation provided. 6. Under the circumstances, we find no infirmity in the directions issued by the learned Single Judge as to what procedure needs to be followed for grant of an OBC certificate applied for by a female who has migrated, post marriage, to the State of Rajasthan. We make it clear once again. Issue of public employment and benefit of reservation has been decided by the Supreme Court and thus our present order would not be misconstrued as enabling anybody to the benefit of reservation. The present order concerns only to the issuance of a certificate applied for." (emphasis supplied) 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State is not in a position to dispute the fact that the issue raised in squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Manju Yadav (supra). 7. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in light of and with similar directions as given in the case of Manju Yadav (supra). 8. Needful would be done by the respondents within a period of ten days from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the competent authority.