Dismissed

Chunchun Devi v. the State of Bihar and Osr

Patna HC26 Apr 2013CWJC/7264/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an Extremely Backward Class woman, challenged the withdrawal of her recommendation for a PDS license granted under the Backward Class category. The Court noted the existence of separate reservation quotas for Extremely Backward Classes and Backward Classes. It held that vacancies earmarked for Extremely Backward Classes cannot be claimed under the Backward Class roster, dismissing the

What did the court decide?

No relief granted. The recommendation in favour of the petitioner was withdrawn as she belongs to the Extremely Backward Class, not the Backward Class category for the specific vacancy.

Chunchun Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Osr — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7264 of 2010 ====================================================== Chunchun Devi W/O Sri Rajkumar Sah R/O Vill.- Parsauni Baij, P.S. Piparahi, Distt.- Sheohar .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supplies, Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Department Of Food And Civil Supplies, Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate-Cum-Chairman, District Selection Committee, Sheohar 5. The Subdivisional Officer, Sheohar 6. The District Supply Officer-Cum-Secretary, District Selection Committee, Sheohar .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K.Agarwal, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Hussain Majeed, A.C. to AAG VII ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 13 26-04-2013 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶2

In view of the fact that separate parts of the order dated 21.6.2011 are under challenge in C.W.J.C. Nos. 7264 of 2010 and 18040 of 2010, C.W.J.C. No. 18040 of 2010 would be considered separately.

¶3

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in I.A. No. 307/2013 by describing the order dated 21.6.2011 as Annexure 5 in place of Annexure 1.

¶4

Initially this writ application has been filed on

¶5

Patna High Court CWJC No.7264 of 2010 (13) dt.26-04-2013

¶6

2 / 5

¶7

behalf of the petitioner for a direction to the respondent authorities for issuance of a licence for running a shop under public distribution system in her favour in view of the resolution passed in the meeting of the District Selection Committee dated 6.10.2009 as contained in Annexure 1. However, subsequently I.A. No. 307/2013 was filed for amendment in the writ application by addition of a relief for quashing of Annexure 5 dated 21.6.2011 by which the recommendation made in favour of the petitioner has been withdrawn.

¶8

I.A. No. 307/2013 is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to challenge Annexure 5 dated 21.6.2011 appended thereto.

¶9

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that, vide the resolution dated 6.10.2009, the petitioner‟s name was recommended for grant of licence under Backward Class category. However, subsequently it was found by the authority that the petitioner belongs to the Extremely Backward Classes category and, since the vacancy was earmarked for the backward Classes category, she was not found fit for the same. Accordingly, the recommendation was cancelled / withdrawn. Mr. N.K.Agrawal, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that bare perusal of the definition of

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.7264 of 2010 (13) dt.26-04-2013

¶11

3 / 5

¶12

the women of Backward Classes category as contained in Section 2(k) of the Bihar Reservation Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) discloses that the said category means and includes women of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Extremely Backward and Backward Classes. Thus, it is contended that whenever a vacancy is found in Backward Class Category that would definitely include women of Extremely Backward Classes. It is contended that the exclusion of the petitioner and the withdrawal of the recommendation on the aforesaid ground would be invalid.

¶13

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that since the petitioner does not belong to the Backward Classes category and there is separate roster for Backward Class and Extremely Backward Class category, her name has rightly not been considered. On earlier occasion, her name was considered considering her to be an applicant of Backward Class category which was apparently a mistake that had been rectified later on.

¶14

Admittedly the vacancy was earmarked for the Backward Class category. Now the question would be whether the petitioner could be considered for grant of licence under roster of Backward Class category even if she belongs to

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.7264 of 2010 (13) dt.26-04-2013

¶16

4 / 5

¶17

Extremely Backward Class? Prima facie the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, as aforesaid, appears to be very attractive but on deeper scrutiny of the matter it appears that there is separate provision of reservation for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, Extremely Backward Classes and also for women of Backward Classes. The definition of women of Backward Classes definitely includes Women belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Class and Extremely Backward Classes category but Section 4 of the Bihar Reservation Act, 1991 clearly indicates that 3% of the vacancies are to be earmarked for the aforesaid class for the benefit of the women of the categories included in Section 1(k). There is separate reservation of 12% for Backward Classes. Similarly 16% has been reserved for Scheduled Caste, 1 % for Scheduled Tribe and 18% for the Extremely Backward Class. That being the situation, women of category other than Backward Classes, viz. Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Extremely Backward Class can make a claim either against the vacancies reserved for their respective classes or the category viz. Women of Backward Classes but definitely not under the Backward Class category.

¶18

Thus, if a vacancy is there for „Women of

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.7264 of 2010 (13) dt.26-04-2013

¶20

5 / 5

¶21

Backward Classes‟ in that case any woman belonging to the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Extremely Backward Class and Backward Class would be entitled to apply and get a licence under that category. However, for the purposes of vacancies reserved for Extremely Backward Classes or Backward Classes the men and the women belonging to the castes as described in Schedule I and Schedule II of the Act respectively would only be entitled to make application. „Women of Backward Classes‟ as defined under Section 2(k) of the Act would cover such groups which stand enumerated thereunder.

¶22

Thus, in my considered opinion, no ground could

¶23

be put forward by the petitioner warranting interference of this Court in the impugned part of the order contained in Annexure 5.

¶24

Accordingly, this writ application fails and is

¶25

dismissed.

¶26

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)

¶27

Spd/-

Chunchun Devi v. the State of Bihar and Osr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chunchun Devi v. the State of Bihar and Osr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Bali Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Hari Prasad Vs the Chairman,Nagar Panchayat B

Gunjan Kumari and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Vidyanand Paswan Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sri Prabhu Nath Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Janti Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.