Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In a recent case, the Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar held that a woman cannot claim the benefits of reservation just by her marriage to a man belonging to the SC caste since the grant of reservation is made to those who are disadvantaged from birth.
The appellant was born in the ‘agarwal’ family and she married a man belonging to the Jatavs, a scheduled caste community. Later, she was issued a caste certificate of the Jatav community by the district collector based on which she was appointed for the post of teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya No.1, Pathankot, Punjab in which she served for 21 years. Then, a complaint was made against the appellant alleging that the caste certificate bestowed upon her had no connection with her real caste whatsoever after which the Tehsildar by his order of 27.06.2013 cancelled her certificate.
Then, after the dismissal of her writ petition had been dismissed by the court, the appellant Ms.Sunita Singh filed for appeal in the SC. The apex court in this case held that since the appellant does belong to the ‘agarwal’ caste by birth which is in general category, the caste certificate granting upon her the legal status of the ‘Jatav’ community is justified to be cancelled. However, the Court by the exercise of its powers under the Article 142 of the constitution modified the order of termination to one of compulsory retirement considering the fact that she has served for 21 years without any blemish on her record and has in fact become the vice-principal. The Court also pointed out that the appellant had not played any ‘fraud or misrepresentation’ in her records and the question of her caste never came up before this complaint was filed.
86540
103860
630
114
59824