The Supreme Court has ruled that a person belonging to a reserved category has the right to claim the benefit of the reservation in any of the successor states of Bihar or Jharkhand.
However, a person cannot claim the benefit of the quota simultaneously in both successor states after their reorganization in November 2000, the court said.
The higher court also held that members of the reserved category, who are residents of the successor state of Bihar, while participating in the open selection in Jharkhand will be treated as migrants and can participate in the general category without claiming the benefit of the reservation and vice versa. .
A court of UU Judges Lalit and Ajay Rastogi decided the “peculiar issue” after a Jharkhand resident, Pankaj Kumar, a member of the Programmed Caste, filed an appeal against the 2: 1 majority High Court order that he denied his appointment in the 2007 state civil service exam on the basis that his address proof showed that he was a permanent resident of Patna, Bihar.
“It is made clear that the person has the right to claim the benefit of the reserve in the successor state of Bihar or in the state of Jharkhand, but will not have the right to claim the benefit of the reserve simultaneously both in the successor states and in those that are members of the reserved category and are residents of the successor state of Bihar, while participating in the open selection in the state of Jharkhand they will be treated as migrants and will be open to participate in the general category without claiming the benefit of the reservation and vice versa ”, the bank said.
The superior court said that it holds that the majority judgment of the Superior Court of February 24, 2020 is untenable by law and is hereby set aside.
“We also do not agree with the minority judgment in principle and clarify that the person has the right to claim the benefit of the reservation in the successor state of Bihar or the state of Jharkhand, but would not have the right to claim the privileges and benefits of the reservation. simultaneously in both states and, if allowed, it will annul the mandate of articles 341 (1) and 342 (1) of the Constitution, ”said the highest court.
He ordered that Pankaj Kumar be appointed in accordance with his selection in reference to announcement number 11 of 2007 within six weeks and said that he is entitled to his seniority according to his placement in the order of merit with theoretical fixation of salaries and benefits.
The court said that collective readings of the provisions of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, make it clear that persons whose place of origin / domicile on or before the appointed day (November 15, 2000) was Bihar are now found within the districts / regions that form a successor state, ie Jharkhand under Section 3 of the 2000 Act, they became ordinary residents of the state of Jharkhand.
The higher court said that at the same time, to the extent that employees who were in public employment in Bihar on or before November 15, 2000, in addition to those domiciled in any of the districts that became part of Jharkhand, employees who have exercised their option to serve in Jharkhand their existing terms of service will be protected under Section 73 of the 2000 Act.
“It will be grossly unfair and damaging to his interests if the benefits of the privileged reserve and benefits derived therefrom are not being protected in the state of Jharkhand after he is absorbed under Section 73 of the 2000 Act which clearly postulates not only to protect the existing conditions of service, but the benefit of the reservation and the privileges that they enjoyed on or before the designated day, that is, November 15, 2000 in the state of Bihar, which will not be modified to their disadvantage after they became service members in Jharkhand state, ”the high court said.
The higher court said that, in its considered opinion, employees who are members of the SC / ST / OBC whose caste / tribe has been served by an amendment to the Constitution (SC) / (ST) Order of 1950 or by the separate order notification for members of the OBC category, the benefit of the reserve shall remain protected under Section 73 of the Act of 2000 for all practical purposes that may be claimed (including by their wards) for participation in public employment.
“We are of the opinion that the present appellant Pankaj Kumar …, being an active employee (as an assistant professor) in the state of Jharkhand under section 73 of the 2000 Act, would be entitled to claim the benefit of the reserve, including the allowable privileges and benefits for SC category members in Jharkhand for all practical purposes, including participation in open competition for public employment, ”he said.
Kumar was born in 1974 in the Hazaribagh district of Jharkhand, where his father, a permanent resident of Patna, was stationed, and at the age of 15 in 1989, Kumar moved to Ranchi, the state capital that came into being after the reorganization of Bihar on November 15. 2000.
He was appointed assistant professor at a Ranchi school from December 21, 1999 and continued his work as a teacher until 2008 at the same school. In 2008, Kumar applied for the third combined civil services exam in Jharkhand and was summoned for an interview.
He submitted his Caste Certificate dated January 12, 2007 showing him as a Ranchi resident along with his application for Civil Services, which showed his “original residence” as Patna.
"खाना विशेषज्ञ। जोम्बी प्रेमी। अति कफी अधिवक्ता। बियर ट्रेलब्लाजर। अप्रिय यात्रा फ्यान।"