The Rajasthan High Court has declined to grant interim relief to a woman who migrated from Haryana, refusing to stay a restriction that prevents her from claiming Scheduled Caste reservation benefits in the upcoming Panchayati Raj elections. A Division Bench comprising Justice Sudesh Bansal and Justice Anuroop Singhi dismissed the stay application, holding that existing Division Bench precedents categorically deny such benefits to migrated persons.
The appellant had originally approached the court seeking a direction to the State to issue a caste certificate. The authorities had denied the certificate on the ground that a migrated person is not entitled to claim reservation in the State to which they have migrated. A Single Judge partially allowed the petition, directing the issuance of the caste certificate but imposing a rider. The rider specified that the certificate was issued for the limited purpose of claiming benefits specifically made available to migrant persons under government schemes and could not be used to claim reservation in public employment or elections.
Aggrieved by the restriction, the appellant filed an appeal and the present stay application, arguing that the conditions imposed by the Single Judge were arbitrary. The State opposed the application, relying on two Division Bench judgments. In State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Manju Yadav & Ors., the Court had restricted families migrating to Rajasthan from outside the state from claiming reservation benefits in public employment. In Rekha Kumari v. State of Rajasthan, the Court specifically denied the prayer for claiming reservation in Panchayat elections based on a caste certificate obtained by a migrant.
The Bench took note of these precedents and observed that the Division Bench in Rekha Kumari had categorically declined the benefit of reservation to migrated persons in Panchayat elections. The Court further noted that the judgment in Rekha Kumari had directed the authorities to endorse a rider on the caste certificate stating that the migrated person shall not be entitled to claim the benefit of reservation in public employment and elections, including Panchayat elections.
Addressing the appellant's contention that the issue might be sub judice before the Supreme Court, the Bench stated that the Division Bench judgment in Rekha Kumari has not been stayed or set aside. Consequently, the Court was not convinced to take a contrary view and dismissed the stay application.
What is the legal effect of the Rajasthan High Court's refusal to stay the restriction?
The Division Bench dismissed the stay application, upholding the Single Judge's rider that the caste certificate issued to the migrant cannot be used to claim reservation in Panchayat elections. The Court held that the binding Division Bench precedent in Rekha Kumari, which bars such claims, remains operative as it has not been stayed by the Supreme Court.
Precedents Cited by the State
Case | Principle Established |
|---|---|
State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Manju Yadav & Ors. | Migrant families from outside Rajasthan cannot claim reservation benefits in public employment. |
Rekha Kumari v. State of Rajasthan | Migrants cannot claim reservation in Panchayat elections based on caste certificates; certificates must carry a rider to this effect. |