(1.) The short but interesting question in this Writ Petition is whether the petitioner, who belongs to a high caste family (Malhotras of Punjab) and who married Fit. Ltd. C D. Ginda, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste (Adharmi community i.e.chamar). is also entitled to be treated as a Scheduled Caste candidate in respect of a public office reserved for backward communities, Scheduled Castes and Tribes.
(2.) The marriage is said to have taken place on 15th January, 1969 (this fact has not been stated in the petition, but Shri D.K,.Kapur, learoed counsel for the petitioner, states this from the bar and this fact has not been disputed. The petitioner graduated from the Delhi University and also passed the one year intensive .course in Russian from the Institute of Russian Studies, Jawaharlal Mehru University , New Delhi in the year 1966. When a post of Senior Russina-to-English Translator in the Ministry of Defence in the scale of Rs. 325-575 was advertised she applied for that post. She took a written test on the basis of which she was called for interview on 13th June.l972. She was, however, selected for the post of Junior Russian/Baglish Translator in the scale of Rs. 125-350. She was placed as serial number two on the panel of selected candidates which consisted of two persons. The person who was Sr. No. 1 was appointed. When the petitioner made inquiries why she did not get the order of appointment she was tole that the post was reserved for a Scheduled Caste Giandidate and that being a member of the higher caste herself she could not be given that post merely of the ground of her marriage with a Schedule Caste.
(3.) There can be no doubt that the petitioner had become a Sapinda of her husband who belongs to the Scheduled Caste by virtue of her marriage. The distinction between Anuloma and Pratiloma marriages according to the traditional Hindu Law and the-difference of opinion that existed concerning whether the Pratiloma marriage was valid or not have lost their importance by reason of the Hindu Marriage Act; Section 4 prescribes that the provisions of this Act would apply notwithstanding any rule of Hindu Law or custom to the contrary; Section 5 permits any Hindu to marry another Hindu provided there is no disqualifying feature mentioned in that section, none of which is present in this case.