LAWS(PAT)-2024-1-140

MANJU DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 15, 2024
MANJU DEVI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitions are placed before us on a reference made, doubting a Division Bench decision of this Court in Animesh Sil v. State of Bihar 2011 (1) PLJR 1164. The Division Bench in the case of a selection & appointment to the post of Junior Scientist-cum-Assistant Professor in Agriculture Statistics, held that the appellant who is a native of Nagaland included in the Scheduled Caste list for that State, cannot claim the benefit of reservation within the State of Bihar. The reference order expressed a dissent, especially since the decision was not directly relating to elections; the reservations in which was the subject of consideration in the writ petition. The matter was referred for consideration by a Division Bench since, insofar as reservations to elections, especially in the context of a person who has come to Bihar by reason only of a marriage, it was opined, there were wider ramifications. The reference order reckoned Hindu Law by which a woman on being married is uprooted from her original family and replanted in her matrimonial home. It was observed that, on such marriage and taking up residence in the matrimonial home and State, she becomes a permanent and full member of that family. She would be deemed to be part and parcel of not only that family, but also the State of Bihar. In which event, it would be unfair to deny her the rights and privileges which are available to a person who hails and is residing within the State of Bihar.

(2.) On facts, it has to be noticed that except in CWJC No. 5516 of 2023, all the petitioners belong to the 'Teli' caste and were residents of the State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein they are included under the Other Backward Classes (OBC). In the State of Bihar 'Teli' is included in the Extremely Backward Classes (EBC). The petitioners contested in the reserved post to the Panchayats and got elected. Insofar as CWJC No. 5516 of 2023 is concerned, the petitioner belonged to a Scheduled Caste (SC), 'Pashi', within U.P. and later migrated to the State of Bihar on marriage. The petitioners were disqualified for reason of they being original residents of another State, thus disentitled to reservation within the State of Bihar.

(3.) We heard learned counsel Shri S.B.K. Mangalam and Shri Radha Mohan Pandey appearing for the petitioners, Shri Suresh Prasad Bhakta, learned counsel for the respondent, learned Advocate General, Shri P.K. Shahi and Dr. Md. Raisul Haque (SC-10) for the State, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Election Commission.