Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

“Marriage Can’t Alter Reserved Status”: Upholds Caste Certificate Cancellation: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court of India upheld the cancellation of a caste certificate obtained by an individual for claiming reservation benefits. The judgment, delivered by the bench of Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice J B Pardiwala, emphasized that marriage cannot alter an individual’s reserved status as determined at birth.

The case, arising from an appeal filed by the Bhubaneswar Development Authority, revolved around the validity of a caste certificate that had enabled an individual to secure a job reserved for Scheduled Castes. The appellant challenged a High Court judgment that directed the reconsideration of the individual’s claim for reinstatement based on outdated legal precedents.

The Supreme Court observed, “Acquisition of the status of Scheduled Caste by marriage would play fraud on the Constitution,” citing the decisions of Valsamma Paul v. Cochin University and Anjan Kumar v. Union of India. The Court clarified that a person’s status is determined at birth and cannot be altered post-marriage to claim reservation benefits.

In its detailed judgment, the Court reiterated the importance of caste certificates in reservation posts and the relevance of caste claims by birth, while also discussing the impact of invalidation on disciplinary proceedings and salary recovery.

Furthermore, the Court noted that the single judge’s direction for reconsideration was based on precedents that have since been overruled by a larger bench in Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India v. Jagdish Balaram Bahira.

The bench stated, “Irrespective of whether or not the caste claim of the first respondent was fraudulent or otherwise, it is evident that the benefit which she obtained securing employment against a reserved post would have to be set aside once the caste claim has been rejected.”

Appellant’s appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment set aside, and the first respondent’s caste certificate invalidation was upheld. The Court also ordered that no recovery shall be made from the first respondent’s salary for the period worked.

Date of Decision: May 02, 2023

Bhubaneswar Development Authority vs Madhumita Das & Ors                 

                         

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/02-May-2023_Bhuvneshwar_Dev_Auth_Vs_Madhumita.pdf"]

Latest Legal News