Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute over the appointment of the Respondent, Mr. Abhinav Dipakbhai Patel, as Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. The Respondent belongs to the 'Dhodia' caste, which is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in both Gujarat and the Union Territory. He migrated from Gujarat to the Union Territory and possessed a caste certificate from Gujarat. The Union Territory advertised two posts, one reserved for Scheduled Tribes, with weightage for local candidates. The Respondent applied, but his result was not announced. After representations and directions from the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, he filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, which directed his appointment. The Union Territory appealed to the Supreme Court. The key legal issue was whether a migrant from another State can claim reservation in a Union Territory where the same caste is recognized as Scheduled Tribe. The Appellants argued that reservation is restricted to local candidates based on policy and the Presidential Order. The Respondent contended that he was a resident and eligible. The Supreme Court analyzed the Presidential Order for Dadra and Nagar Haveli, which defines Scheduled Tribes as those who are residents of the Union Territory. The Court held that reservation is State/UT-specific and a migrant cannot claim reservation in another State/UT even if the caste is recognized there. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and dismissing the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Reservation - Scheduled Tribes - Migrant - A person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in one State cannot claim reservation in another State/UT where the same caste is recognized as Scheduled Tribe, as the Presidential Order for Scheduled Tribes is State/UT-specific. The benefit of reservation is available only to those who are residents/domiciled in that State/UT. (Paras 8-10) B) Service Law - Domicile - Weightage - The Union Territory policy of giving weightage to local candidates does not entitle a migrant to claim reservation. The policy of giving additional marks to locals does not imply that outsiders are eligible for reservation. (Paras 7, 10) C) Service Law - Appointment - Scheduled Tribe Certificate - A caste certificate issued by one State does not entitle the holder to claim reservation in another State/UT unless the caste is included in the Presidential Order for that State/UT and the person is a resident thereof. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in one State can claim the benefit of reservation in a Union Territory where the same caste is recognized as Scheduled Tribe but the person is a migrant?
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court, and dismissed the writ petition filed by the Respondent.
Law Points
- Reservation for Scheduled Tribes is State/UT-specific
- Migrant cannot claim reservation in another State/UT
- Presidential Order defines Scheduled Tribes for each State/UT
- Domicile requirement for reservation is valid
