Judgment:
$~21 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 3524/2018 and CM APPL. 13894/2018 AMITA GIRI & ANR. ........ Petitioner
Through:... Petitioner
in person. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS
Through: Mr Anuj Aggarwal, Addl. Standing Counsel with Mr R.A.A. Khan, Advocates for R
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER
2201.2019 The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying 1. as under: “a) b) c) To issue an appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the... RESPONDENTS
to grant the benefits attached to NT to which the... Petitioner
’s daughter is legally entitled; To issue an appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the... RESPONDENTS
to pay an amount of Rs. 75,00,000/- towards the damages suffered by the... Petitioner
s at the hands of the... RESPONDENTS
. To issue an appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the... RESPONDENTS
to pay the legal expenses incurred by the... Petitioner
s;” 2. The petitioners claim that they belong to the Gosavi Caste, W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 1 of 7 which is a notified Nomadic Tribe in the State of Maharashtra. The daughter of the petitioners (hereafter ‘their Daughter’) was also issued a caste certificate by the Government of Maharashtra, indicating that she belongs to the Gosavi Caste, which is recognized as a nomadic under tribe the Government Resolution CBC-1361/M dated 21.11.1961. The petitioners contend that by virtue of the aforesaid caste 3. certificate issued by the Government of Maharashtra, their Daughter is entitled to get reservation and other benefits in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The petitioners place reliance on the judgment rendered by a full bench of this Court in Deepak Kumar & Ors. v. District & Sessions Judge, Delhi & Ors.:
2012. (132) DRJ169and, on the strength of the said decision, contend that in cases where a person migrates from a State to a Union Territory, he/she would carry the reservation and other benefits to the Union Territory and thus, their Daughter will also be entitled for monetary benefits in Delhi on the basis of the caste certificate issued to her, by the State of Maharashtra.
4. The limited question which arises for consideration in the present petition is whether the petitioners’ daughter is entitled to any benefits in the NCT of Delhi on account of belonging to a notified nomadic tribe in the State of Maharashtra. Briefly stated, the controversy in the present petition arises in 5. the following context:
5. 1 The petitioners along with their Daughter shifted to Delhi in the W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 2 of 7 in the year 2013, the year 2011, from Maharashtra. Thereafter, Government of Maharashtra issued a certificate indicating that their Daughter belongs to the Gosavi Caste, which is recognized as a nomadic tribe under the Government Resolution CBC-1361/M dated 21 November, 1961. The said nomadic tribe has been listed in the category of ‘Central List of Other Backward Classes’ for the State of Maharashtra by virtue of Resolution No.12011/68/93-BCC(C) dated 10.09.1993. Thereafter, the petitioners filed an application dated 20.07.2015 5.2 before the respondents to issue a nomadic tribe caste certificate to their daughter. The said application was duly received by the respondents, and an acknowledgment slip was issued in this regard. In terms of the said receipt, the proposed date for disposal of the application made by the petitioners was 18.09.2015. Further, the petitioners’ daughter was required to fill the application form for a schedule caste certificate. The said application was not disposed of in a time bound manner. 5.3 Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, the petitioners preferred a writ petition – being W.P.(C) 6046/2016 – before this Court. The said petition was disposed of by an order dated 18.07.2016, directing the respondents to dispose of the said application within a period of three weeks with intimation to the petitioners. Thereafter, the said caste certificate was not 5.4 issued by the respondents and, as a consequence, the petitioners preferred another in its judgment dated petition – W.P.(C) 879/2017. This Court, W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 3 of 7 07.07.2017, noted that the Nomadic Tribe Gosavi was listed in the category of ‘Central List of Other Backward Classes’ at Serial No.188 for the State of Maharashtra, by virtue of Resolution No.12011/68/93- BCC(C) dated 10.09.1993. It was accordingly held that the petitioners’ daughter satisfies the requirement for issuance of an “Other State OBC Certificate”, in terms of the Office Order dated 26.11.2015 on the subject of “Simplified Procedure for Issuance of Various Kinds of Certificate by Revenue Department” and the notification dated 08.04.1994, issued by the Ministry of Welfare, Government of India on the subject “Issuing of Other Backward Class Certificates to migrants from other States/UTs”. In light of the above observations, the said petition was allowed and this Court directed the respondents to issue an “Other State OBC Certificate” to their daughter. 5.5 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioners filed an appeal – LPA6672017 captioned Amita Giri & Agam Giri vs Lt. Governor & Anr. – before the Division Bench of this Court. A copy of the Memorandum of Appeal has not been annexed with the present petition. However, it does appear from the order dated 18.01.2018 passed by the Division Bench, that the petitioners had sought several directions including that a certificate belonging to a Nomadic Tribes be issued to the daughter to enable her to seek waiver of fees and other concessions. The Division Bench had further noted that the question whether 5.6 Nomadic Tribes are to be included in Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is engaging the attention of a commission set up by the Central W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 4 of 7 Government on 02.01.2015 and, therefore, at this stage, no relief with regard to granting benefits as are available to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, could be granted to their Daughter. Nonetheless, the Division Bench had issued orders directing the respondent to indicate whether special monetary benefits could be granted to their daughter. In this regard, the Court was informed that the Government of NCT of Delhi had considered the case of their daughter as an exception, and decided to release funds equivalent fees. Admittedly, the said funds have since been released. to one year’s school 6. The relief sought by the petitioners is twofold. First, that their Daughter be issued a certificate indicating she belongs to a Nomadic Tribe. Second, that she be provided benefits as available to their Daughter in the State of Maharashtra.
7. Insofar as the issuance of certificate is concerned, this Court had already passed an order in W.P.(C) 6046 of 2016 directing the respondents to issue a “Other State OBC Certificate” to the daughter.
8. As noticed above, the prayer made by the petitioners in the present petition is with regard to benefits available to a notified nomadic tribe. In this regard, the respondents have confirmed that there is no scheme of the Government of NCT of Delhi under which any benefits are available to persons relating to a nomadic tribe of any state. Thus, no direction in this regard can be issued.
9. The petitioners had relied upon the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Deepak Kumar & Ors. (supra) and had drawn the W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 5 of 7 attention of this Court to the observation that “the resident of a state who moves to a Union Territory would be entitled to carry his reservation benefit, and status as member of the scheduled casts, even if his caste is not included as a scheduled caste, for that Union Territory”. On the strength of the aforesaid observation, it was contended that the petitioners would be entitled to benefits, as available to a Nomadic Tribe, in the NCT of Delhi.
10. The said contention is unmerited. The observations referred to by the petitioners were in the context of the decision of the Supreme Court in S. Pushpa and Ors. v. Sivachanmugavelu and Ors.: (2005) 3 SCC1 The controversy involved in S. Pushpa (supra) related to a Circular dated 06.01.1993 issued by the Government of Puducherry, which provided that all orders regarding reservation for Scheduled Casts/Scheduled Tribes issued by the Department of Personnel in respect of posts / services under the Central Government were also applicable to posts/services under Puducherry Administration. It was further clarified that any candidate belonging to the SC/ST category anywhere in the country, would be eligible for a reserved vacancy under the Central Government. It was contended by the writ petitioner that in an earlier judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Marri Chandra Shekher Rao v. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & Ors.: (1990) 3 SCC130 it was held that the benefits of reservation would not be available to candidates who had migrated from other states. The said contention was not accepted and the Supreme Court held that the decision in Marri Chandra Shekher Rao (supra) was inapplicable, if W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 6 of 7 the Union Territory had adopted a policy to grant benefits of reservation to candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who had migrated from other states. this Court The decision of the Supreme Court in S. Pushpa (supra) is of no 11. assistance to the petitioners to claim benefits from the Government of NCT of Delhi, where no such benefits are provided to the petitioners’ community. The Division Bench of (of which the undersigned was a member) had considered the import of the decision in the case of S. Pushpa (supra), in the context of reservation in admission to educational institutions in the NCT of Delhi in Ankit Roy v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University: LPA5872013, decided on 11.09.2013. In that case, it was held that the benefits of admission against reserved seats would not be available to a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Castes in relation to a state, unless the policy of extending such benefits is adopted by the Government of NCT of Delhi in admission to educational institutions.
12. In the present case, the Government of NCT has not adopted any scheme of benefits whereby the same are extended to the Nomadic Tribes notified in the State of Maharashtra or other States. Thus, the relief as prayed for by the petitioners cannot be granted. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. The pending application 13. is also disposed of. JANUARY22 2019/RK VIBHU BAKHRU, J W.P. (C) 3524/2018 Page 7 of 7