Caste of married women applying for government job must be decided based on parents' caste certificate, not husband's: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Monday ordered that when determining the caste of married women who have applied for the government job, it is the caste certificate of the parents of the applicant which has to be considered and not that of the husband [Akshata Chougala vs The State of Karnataka and Ors.]. .Justice M Nagaprasanna was surprised that the State was time and again repeating the same mistake of relying on a government order (GO) in this regard which was prima facie unsustainable."I hold that the action of the selecting authority in interpreting and holding that the caste and income of the husband is to be taken into consideration is contrary to law and a direction is to be issued to the respondents to consider the applications of the petitioners on the basis of caste and income certificates of the parents and not their spouse," the Court said..The Court was hearing a batch of pleas by applicants to the post of primary school teachers challenging the State government's action of treating them as falling under general category, without taking into account the caste certificates of their parents.It was their case that they were entitled to reservation under Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. .Senior Advocate K Shashikiran Shetty urged that the State was repeating the mistake though earlier benches had ruled against the same. .He stated that various courts had held that the caste and income certificates of parents will be taken into consideration, and cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in Surinder Singh vs Punjab State Electricity Board among others..Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi on the other hand defended the State's action and stated that the petitioners had an alternate remedy before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act..Further, he contended that the caste and income certificates were to be taken into consideration in terms of the policy of the State laid down in a government order of December 12, 1986, which directs that the caste and income certificate of a married woman shall always relate to the husband and not to the parents, and that the income of the spouse will have to be taken into consideration..The Court in its judgment proceeded to address the contentions. On maintainability, the Court said that given that hundreds of people were aggrieved, it had to set the wrong right instead of redirecting the petitioners to the tribunal. ."Merely because there exists an alternative remedy as provided under the statute, fetters cannot be laid at the hands of this Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to remedy any situation which would warrant immediate and necessary interference," it said..Further, relying on the judgment in Surinder Singh, the Court rejected the submission of the Advocate General that it is the caste and income certificate of the spouse that has to be taken into account. The Court said that the Supreme Court has made it clear that the caste certificate of the parents that needs to be considered. ."The submission of the learned Advocate General is, that the Apex Court in the case of INDRA SAWHNEY (supra) had permitted the State Governments to regulate the procedures providing reservations to other backward classes and therefore, the Government Order dated 12.12.1986 or the Government Order dated 28.10.1993 should be followed, would amount to placing the Government Order on a higher pedestal than that of the judgment of the Apex Court, the Division Bench of this Court and that of the co-ordinate Bench, which can by no stretch of imagination be done, therefore, the said submission is rejected," the Court explained..Hence, the Court held that the action of the selecting authority, Deputy Director of Public Instruction (DDPI), in holding that the caste and income certificate of the spouse was to be taken into consideration, was contrary to law. It also held that DDPI had no authority to interpret caste certificates issued by competent authorities."It is rather surprising that the State is time and again repeating the very same mistake and driving the applicants to knock at the doors of this Court despite the declaration of law by the Apex Court and that of this Court, by clinging on to a Government Order dated 12.12.1986, which is on the face of it unsustainable," the Court said..As a result, it allowed the petitions and directed that the petitioners be treated as belonging to the categories mentioned in the caste certificate of their parents. It also quashed the selection list which treated them as general category candidates. .[Read Judgment]