IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 454 of 2011 Dharampal Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Present : Mr. M. S. Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H. M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate for respondent no.5. Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for respondent no.6. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. M. S. Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. H.M.Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand, Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate for respondent no.5 and Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for respondent no.6. 2. The petitioner has challenged the caste certificate granted to respondent no.6. According to the petitioner, respondent no.6 belongs to “Banjara” caste, which is an “Other Backward Class” (from hereinafter referred to as OBC) and not Scheduled Caste (from hereinafter referred to as SC). All the same, respondent no.6 contested for election of “Pradhan”, which was reserved for SC candidate. 3. Respondent no.6, on the other hand, contested that she was born in SC community in Dehradun and subsequently, married to a person belonging to OBC community. Counsel for respondent no. 6 has further relied upon a decision of this Court in Smt. Madhu Arya Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others reported in 2011 (1) U.D., 292 where a Division Bench of this Court has held that merely because a person married into another community his caste will not change into community in which he got married. Therefore, in view of the law down 2 by this Court in Madhu Arya case (supra) respondent no.6 will remain in SC community. Learned counsel for the petitioner though contends that the caste certificate granted to respondent no.6 by the concerned authorities is of “Banjara”, caste, which admittedly belongs to OBC. 4. Learned Advocate General Mr. S. N. Babulkar present in Court today has submitted that presently there is a Caste Scrutiny Committee in the State of Uttarakhand which decides such matters. 5. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and another Vs. Addl. Commr. Tribal Development, Thane and others reported in (1997) 5 SCC 437, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Haridwar to refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee within three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. Once the matter reaches before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, it is hoped and expected that Caste Scrutiny Committee shall decide the matter, as expeditiously as possible. 6. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 22.12.2011 Kuldeep