VINEET SHARMA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to a certificate granted in favour of the respondent No. 5. By this certificate respondent No. 5 has been declined to be resident of an area described as area falling under the Actual Line of Control. This certificate enables its holder to certain benefits. Respondent No. 5 got admission in the discipline of MBBS. The petitioner appears to have been deprived of this benefit. The question quavalidity of the certificate, was examined by the Deputy Commissioner, Poonch. This was done in the exercise of power conferred upon him under Rule 32 of the J&K Reservation Rules of 1994 popularly known as SRO 126 of 1994. These Rules were issued on 28 -03 -1994. The certificate in question is regulated by Rule 29 (2) (c). For facility of reference this is being reproduced below: "A person claiming the benefit on the grounds that he/she belongs to area near the Line of Actual Control must establish that he/she resided in the area for a period of not less than 15 years prior to the date of application and is actually residing in the said area. However a person shall not be disentitled from claiming this benefit only on the ground his/her father or the person on whom he/she is dependent is living in a place which is not identified as backward or area near the Line of Actual Control on account of his employment business or other professional or vocational reasons."

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the benefit of this Rule could be givens only to that person who had resided in the area for a period of not less than 15 years prior to the date of application. He submits that the benefit given to respondent No. 5 on the ground that her parents were in service and therefore her case is covered by the last paragraph of the Rule referred to above is a conclusion which is not justified.

(3.) THE evidence which has come on the record and which was appreciated by the Deputy Commissioner, Poonch is as under: (i) Voter list of Bakshi Nagar in the city of Jammu indicating enrolment of the petitioner in the electoral Roll alongwith his father grand father and other family members. (ii) Spot enquiry conducted by the Deputy Commissioner, Poonch in which he arrived at following conclusions: (a) That the grand father of respondent No. 5 is having a shop in Golad Mendhar where he was working as a gold smith and was infact working. (b) Grand father owns a house in this area. (c) The ration card and the mal shumari i.e. census operation indicates the presence of respondent No. 5 and her father at the place in question. (d) The Deputy Commissioner as a revisional authority also recorded the statements of Numberdar, Chowkidarand other citizens. These were to the effect that the father of the respondent No. 5 is a Government employee and has been away from the place which falls within the line of actual control. On account of this factor they had to move from place to place. (e) Misal Haqiat of 1961 -62 was also perused. It was found that the family was allotted land as refugees in village Dharana Mendhar and thereafter, they have shifted to Golad Mendhar.