HIZWANA BANO Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. By consent, heard forthwith. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed, notice to respondent no. 3 is dispensed with.

(2.) THE petitioner was aggrieved by the caste certificate issued in favour of respondent no. 3. THE post of Village Pradhan of Gaon Sabha- Lotha was reserved for female candidate of backward caste. According to the petitioner, respondent no. 3 obtained a caste certificate that she belongs to Muslim Kayasth, which has been issued by respondent no. 2. According to the petitioner, respondent no. 3 belongs to the caste 'Sekh Firozi'. In the list of Other Backward Class, meant for the State of Uttar Pradesh, this caste has not been included in the category of backward class.

(3.) BEFORE dealing with the issue, we may refer a judgment of the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and anr. vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and ors., (1994) 6 SCC 241. The Supreme Court in para 13 of the said judgement laid down the following guidelines:-