Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

“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