Allowed

Krishna Garg v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2022CW/1040/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the denial of a Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area) due to her marriage and subsequent move. The Court interpreted the relevant government notification, holding that eligibility conditions are independent categories. Consequently, the Court directed the authorities to issue the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Sub Divisional Officer and Tehsildar to issue a Special Bonafide Resident Certificate to the petitioner within 15 days of receipt of required documents.

Krishna Garg Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1040/2020

¶3

Krishna Garg D/o Madan Lal Garg, Aged About 31 Years, B/c Garg, R/o Gudla, Rajsamand, Rajasthan, 313301.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretariat, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

District Collector, Collectorate Office, District, Udaipur.

¶8

Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur.

¶9

Tehsildar, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Urvashi Baya
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Abhilasha Bora Both through VC

¶12

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶13

Order

¶14

02/02/2022

¶15

The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶16

“(a) That the respondents No.3 and 4 may kindly be directed to issue special bonafide resident certificate of TSP area to the Petitioner.

¶17

(b) Any other appropriate writ order or direction which is favourable to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was born in Lohar Mohalla Village Post Debari District Udaipur, a TSP Area, which is evident from her Bonafide Resident Certificate dated 30.10.2001 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer. She pointed out that when the petitioner applied for grant of

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[CW-1040/2020]

¶21

Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area), she was not issued the same, and was orally informed that since the petitioner has started residing in a non-TSP area, post her marriage, she is not entitled for the Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area).

¶22

Inviting attention of the Court towards circular dated 4.7.2016 and notification dated 21.10.2019, notification issued by the State Government, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the respondents cannot deny grant of Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area) to her. He prayed for a direction to the respondents to issue a TSP certificate.

¶23

Ms. Abhilasha Bora, learned counsel for the respondent – state argued that the petitioner is not entitled to the TSP certificate, as after her marriage she has started living outside area and thus, her case is not covered by the notification dated 21.10.2019, issued by the Governor in exercise of powers under para No.5 of V Schedule appended with Article 244 of the Constitution of India, more particularly the explanation appended therewith. She emphasised that since the petitioner does not fulfill condition (x) of the explanation she cannot take advantage of the notification dated 21.10.2019.

¶24

A careful reading of the notification more particularly its explanation reveals that it has three components (d) ([k) and (x). It is to be noted that between (d) and ([k) punctuation ‘ ; ’ has been used whereas between ([k) and (x) expression “;k” has been used. Grammatically interpreted it means that to be eligible for benefits under the notification a candidate should fulfill either of the three conditions mentioned in (d), ([k) or (x). The petitioner

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[CW-1040/2020]

¶27

falls in the category of ‘[k’, hence the condition given in (x) which is preceded by expression “;k” is not required to be fulfilled by her. 6. Petitioner neither falls in category (x) nor is it necessary for a person falling in the category ([k) to also fulfill condition (x) as they are two independent and mutually exclusive categories. 7. The respondents thus, cannot deny the petitioner Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area) simply because she has moved out of TSP Area, as a consequence of her marriage. Special bonafide residence or residence is to be reckoned from the native place of residence of the candidate and his parents. It has nothing to do with marriage.

¶28

The respondent No.3 and 4 are directed to issue Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area) to the petitioner in accordance with law. If the respondents are of the view that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of Special Bonafide Resident Certificate (TSP Area), they shall pass a speaking order and send the same to the petitioner.

¶29

For the purpose aforesaid, the petitioner shall furnish a representation alongwith the certified copy of the order instant and the photostat copy of the application form (Annex.4). On receipt of the same, the Tehsildar concerned shall do the needful within a period of 15 days.

¶30

The writ petition is therefore allowed in above terms.

¶31

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶33

108-A.Arora/-

Krishna Garg v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Garg v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Vaishnav Vs the Union of India

Prakash Vs Union of India

Gunwanti Devi Vs Union of India

Geeta Devi Sharma Vs Union of India

Jai Brahmani Construction Company Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunita Rani Vs the State of Rajasthan