Validity of BC & SC Certificate
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 14 April 2011
This query is : Resolved
X (Female) is appointed as teacher in Govt School on contract basis in Backward Class(BC) Certificate on Aug 2009. X was married with Y (Male) in Oct 2008. Y is Scheduled Caste(SC). X name was registered in Y Ration Card on May 2009. X prepare their BC certificate on Jul 2009 with his father old Ration card photostat in which the name of the X is lies. But actually in May 2009 X father struck out his name.
Y prepare the SC Certificate of X in Dec 2009 with his ration card in which name f the X is add in May 2009.
Now X has 2 certificates, one is BC on which X is appointed and second in SC.
Is the BC certificate of X is valid or not.
or
Is the SC certificate of X is valid or not.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 14 April 2011
X will continue to retain her original community certificate (BC) in spite of marrying into any other community (whether SC, OC or any other community).
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 14 April 2011
Thanks, But X prepare their BC certificate with Fake document i.e old ration card in which his name was struck out and X is staying with Y in some other address. Lamberdar, sarpanch verify that X is staying with his father. Could you tell me that May any consequences occur in future.
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 14 April 2011
She will inherit the SC status of her husband, as according to SC guidelines, a SC/ST women do no inherit the status of her husband whereas any other women inherits the status of her husband with respect to the caste.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 14 April 2011
Dear Mr. Gulshan,
Please make available the relevant citations of the SC decisions.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 14 April 2011
Thanks to all of You,
Dear Mr Gulshan Ji, Kindly make available the relevant citation of the SC decisions
V.S.Massaaun
(Expert) 14 April 2011
yes i also need the citation
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 01 May 2011
please provide me the citation
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
the question of harmonising the conflict between the personal law and the constitutional animation behind Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution. The concepts of "equality before law" and "equal protection of the laws" guaranteed by Article 14 and its species Articles 15(4) and 16(4) aim at establishing social and economic justice in political democracy to all sections of the society, to eliminate inequalities in status and to provide facilities and opportunities not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of people belonging to Scheduled Castes (for short "Dalits')', Scheduled Tribes (for short Tribes') and Other backward Classes of citizens (for short OBCs) to secure adequate means of livelihood and to promote with special care the economic and educational tt interests of the weaker sections of the people, in particular, Dalits and Tribes so as to protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation. By 42nd Constitution (Amendment) Act, secularism and socialism were brought in the Preamble of the Constitution to realise that in a democracy unless all sections of the society are provided facilities and opportunities to participate in political democracy irrespective of caste, religion, and sex, political democracy would not last long. Dr. Ambedkar in his closing speech on the draft Constitution stated on November 25, 1949 that "what we must do is not to be attained with mere political democracy; we must make, our political democracy a social democracy as well, Political democracy cannot last unless there lies on the base of it a social democracy". Social democracy means "a way of life which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as principles of life". They are not separate items in a trinity but they form union of trinity. To diversify one from the other is to defeat the very purpose of democracy. Without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over the many. Equality without liberty would kill individual initiative. Without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural course of things. Articles 15(4) and 16(4), therefore, intend to remove social and economic inequality to make equal opportunities available in reality. Social and economic justice is a right enshrined for the protection of society. The right to social and economic justice envisaged in the Preamble and elongated in the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of the Constitution, in particular, Articles 14, 15, 16, 21, 38, 39 and 46 of the Constitution, is to make the quality of the life of the poor, disadvantaged and disabled citizens of the society, meaningful. Equal protection in Article 14 requires affirmative action for those unequals by providing facilities and opportunities. While Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, Article 15(4) enjoins upon the State, despite the above injunction and the one provided in Article 29(2), to make special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Dalits and Tribes. Equally, while Article 16(1) guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State, Article 16(4) enjoins upon the State to make provision for reservation for these sections which in the opinion of the State are not adequately represented in the services under the State. Article 335 of the Constitution mandates that claims of the members of the Dalits and Tribes shall be taken into consideration in making appointments to services and posts in connection with affairs of the Union or of a State consistent with the maintenance of efficiency of administration. Therefore, this Court interpreted that equal protection guaranteed by Articles 14, 15(1) and 16(1) is required to operate consistently with Articles 15(4), 16(4), 38, 39, 46 and 335 of the Constitution, vide per majority in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India [1992] Supp. 3 SCC 217 known as Mandal case. In other words, equal protection requires affirmative action for those unequals handicapped due to historical facts of untouchability practiced for millennium which is abolished by Article 17; for Tribes living away from our national mainstream due to social and educational backwardness of OBCs.
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Nataraja v. Selection Committee (1972) 1 Mys. L. J. 226 and R. Srinivasa v. Chairman Selection Committee , the Karnataka High
Court consistently had held that on adoption a boy, belonging to a forward caste by a backward class citizen, is not entitled to the benefit of reservation under Article 15(4).
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
writ petition No. 1313 of 1992, the petitioner lady born in a Vysya community (Business community) was married to a Bestha (fishermen community - a backward class - A category). She applied for admission into Post-Graduate Medical Course (D.C.H.) under the quota reserved for Backward Class - A Group. Her writ petition was allowed by a learned single Judge holding that a marriage was not an agreement. It is a sacrament. After marriage she was no more a member of her parents' family but became a member of her husband's family. Therefore, she was entitled to be a member of the backward class.
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Khazan Singh v. Union of India AIR 1980 Delhi 60 a single Judge of the Delhi High Court had held that on adoption of a jat boy into Scheduled Caste A family, he became entitled to the benefit of reservation Under Arts 16(4)
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Mohan Rao's case would give the benefit of reservation? In that case, parents of Mohan Rao originally belonged to a Scheduled Caste in A.P. Mohan Rao became a Christian but reconverted into Hinduism and claimed the status as a Scheduled Caste. The Constitution Bench had held that by reconversion, he could not become a Hindu but recognition by the community is a precondition. In that case, it was found that caste/community had recognised him after reconversion as a member of the Scheduled Caste.
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Under cl. (3) of the 1950 Order only two conditions are required for being eligible for election to a reserved constituency-
(a) that the candidate should not profess a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion, and (b) that the candidate is a member of scheduled caste as shown in the schedules.
In the instant case, it is not disputed that the Katia caste is mentioned as a scheduled caste in part IX of the 1950 Order and shown at serial Number 29.
Having regard to the circumstances discussed above, it cannot be said that at the time when the respondent filed her nomination papers, she was not a member of the Katia caste.
For the reasons given above, the judgment of the High Court is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed but in the circumstances without any order as to costs. H.S.K. Appeal dismissed
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Kailash Sonkar vs Smt. Maya Devi on 16 December, 1983
Equivalent citations:
1984 AIR 600,
1984 SCR (2) 176
Bench: Fazalali, S Murtaza
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 06 May 2011
Regarding fake documents:
The delay in the process is inevitable but that factor should neither be considered to be relevant nor be an aid to complete the course of study. But for the fact that she has completed the entire course except to appear for the final examination, we would have directed to debar her from prosecuting the studies and appearing in the examination. In this factual situation no useful purpose would be served to debar her from appearing for the examination of final year MBBS. Therefore, we uphold the cancellation of the social status as Mahadeo Koli fraudulently obtained by Km Suchita Laxman Patil, but she be allowed to appear for the final year examination of MBBS course. She will not, however be entitled in future for any benefits on the basis of the fraudulent social status as Mahadeo Koli. However, this direction should not be treated and used as a precedent in future cases to give any similar directions since the same defeats constitutional goals.
