Will a Schedule Caste person availing of reservation cease to get the same benefit in the successor State upon reorganisation of the parent state, the Supreme Court examined the “peculiar question” on Tuesday.
The apex court said that such a question has cropped up before it for the first time and there are no case laws available as far as substance of the case is concerned and therefore it would like to examine the matter threadbare as the issue can happen anywhere.
It has sought the assistance of Attorney General K K Venugopal, who submitted that reservation in bifurcated states for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) would remain the same as the conditions of backwardness, which affected members of particular castes would be nearly identical for residents in the erstwhile unified state.
A bench of Justices U U Lalit and Ajay Rastogi was faced with question while examining an appeal filed by Pankaj Kumar, an SC who has challenged the Jharkhand High Court''s order of February 24 last year.
The high court''s 2:1 majority verdict held that the petitioner cannot avail the benefit of reservation in both Bihar and Jharkhand and hence cannot get qualified for state civil service examination.
Kumar was born in 1974 in Hazaribagh district of Jharkhand and at the age of 15 in 1989 shifted to Ranchi, the state capital which came into effect after Bihar''s reorganization on November 15, 2000.
He was appointed as assistant teacher in a school in Ranchi from December 21, 1999 and continued his job as teacher till 2008 in the same school. In 2008, Kumar applied for the 3rd Combined Civil Services Exam in Jharkhand and was called for an interview.
He has submitted his Caste Certificate dated January 12, 2007 showing him as resident of Ranchi along with his application for the Civil Services, which showed his ‘original residence’ as Patna.
Additional Advocate General for Jharkhand, Arunabh chowdhury said the state is supporting the majority verdict of the High Court and is of the view that Kumar cannot be allowed to avail the benefit of reservation in both Bihar and Jharkhand.
The bench said that it agrees with the contention that a belonging to SC or ST cannot be allowed to avail the benefit of reservation in both the states but since the caste of Kumar is recognised as scheduled caste by both Bihar and Jharkhand, then why can’t the benefit be extended to people of both the states, as they may belong to same clan.
It said that sometimes area specific reservation is given to the SCs or STs; in that case, Parliament clearly specifies that the quota will be given in that particular state.
Chowdhury referred to earlier verdicts of the top court dealing with related issues and a circular said that even if a particular caste is reserved in both the States, the place of permanent residence will hold importance and not the place of temporary residence.
He said the court has to take into account that Jharkhand has the highest percentage of Schedule Tribe population in the country.
The bench said that people belonging to the same caste irrespective of their residence in both the states should get the same benefit like it was given during the unified state.
Dealing with Kumar’s case, the bench said that he was born and brought up in Hazaribagh and in a way his family tree has two branches one in Patna, other in Jharkhand.