LawDistill
Supreme Court of India

U.P.PUBLIC SER.COMMN vs MADHU RANA on 11 September, 2012

Cites 0 provisionsCites 0 judgmentsCited by 0
C.A. No.-006451-006451 - 2012Official PDFBench Handyala Lakshminarayanaswamy Dattu, Chandramauli Kumar PrasadAdvocates SHAIL KUMAR DWIVEDI | MRIDULA RAY BHARADWAJ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6451 OF 2012
(SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(C.)NO.20896 OF 2010)
U.P.PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION APPELLANT
VERSUS
MADHU RANA & ORS. RESPONDENTS
WITH C.A.NO.6453 OF 2012 @ SLP(C)NO.26616/2010
O R D E R
1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
2. Leave granted.
3. The short question involved in these appeals is, as to
whether a Scheduled Caste(SC)/Other Backward Caste(OBC) candidate,
who has migrated from State 'A' to State 'B', after the marriage, is
legally entitled to claim benefit of the reservation in the latter
State. JUDGMENT
4. The High Court, in the impugned judgments and orders,
answered the aforesaid issue in favour of the respondents.
: 2 :
5. Aggrieved by the judgments and orders, the Uttar Pradesh
Public Service Commission is before us in these appeals.

6.Learned counsel appearing for the U.P.Public Service Commission has brought to our notice the judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of U.P.Public Service Commission Vs. Sanjay Kumar Singh, reported in (2003) 7 SCC 657.

7.We have carefully perused the aforesaid judgment of this Court and also the judgments and orders of the High Court dated 22.04.2010 and 02.07.2010 in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.52252 of 2007 and Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.40614(M/B) of 2008 respectively.

8.In our opinion, the judgments and orders passed by the High Court in the aforesaid Writ Petitions are contrary to the judgment and order passed by this Court in Sanjay Kumar Singh's case (supra). In that view of the matter, we cannot sustain the judgments and orders passed by the High Court. Accordingly, we allow the appeals and set aside the judgments and orders passed by the High Court. JUDGMENT

Ordered accordingly. .......................J. (H.L. DATTU) .......................J. (CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD)

NEW DELHI; SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION XI

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).20896/2010 (From the judgement and order dated 22/04/2010 in CMWP No.52252/2007 of the HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) U.P.PUBLIC SER.COMMN. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

MADHU RANA & ORS. Respondent(s) (With prayer for interim relief and office report ) WITH SLP(C) NO. 26616 of 2010 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) Date: 11/09/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD For Petitioner(s) Mr.Shirish Kumar Mishra, Adv.

Mr.Siddharth Krishna Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Shail Kumar Dwivedi,Adv.(NP)

For Respondent(s) Mr.P.N.Misra, Sr.Adv.

Mr.Raman Yadav, Adv. JUDGMENT Ms.Archana Singh, Adv. For Mr. Abhisth Kumar ,Adv Mr.Ajay Srivastava, Adv. for Ms. Mridula Ray Bharadwaj,Adv. Mr.Ram Awadh Yadav, Adv. Mr.Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Yadav : 2 : UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis. Leave granted. we allow the appeals and set aside the judgments and

orders passed by the High Court, in terms of the signed order. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Court Master

(signed order is placed on the file)

JUDGMENT