(^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Sl No. ^3/f ^ / 2009-10 BwmwT> PETITIONER •^ v^^' ^^f ..^••:':,,<^^ • /Q-'1' .^^' ..-r.\^ ^^'^y '^•^v RESPONDENTS Aarti Meshram aged about 28 years w/o Shri Sanjay Patil, Resident of G.E. road,behind Boudh Vihar ,Pancheel nagar (east),B.M.Y. Charoda District-Durg (C.G.) VERSUS 1. 2. 3. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, sechedule catse & sechudle tribes development department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Principal, Government dental co!lege,Raipur (C.G.) Sub Divisional Officer District - Durg (C.G.) High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Thhough its Member secretary Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University campus,Raipur(C.G.) T ^ % WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 QF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PETITIONER RESPONDENTS HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice PritinkerDiwaker) Writ Petition (S) No. 6349 of 2010 Aarti Meshram VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh and others r^' Shri VivekSharma counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vaibhav Gbverdhan PL for respondents/State. WRITPETmONUNDERARTICLE2260FTHE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA ORDER (29.10.2010) Grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that though she is in possessipn of caste certificate issued by the Collector, Durg then falling in the State ofMadhya Pradesh on 22.9.1992 (Annexure P-1) on the basis of which she was appointed on the post of.Staff Nurse vide Annexure P-5 but nowthe respondents 'are insisting for production of the caste certificate issued by the competent authority ofthe State of Chhattisgarh. 2. Counsel for the petitionersubmits that the point involved in this case is no longer res integra and the same is covered by order dated 19.8.2010 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) 6616/2008. 3. The caste certificates are issued on the basis of circulars, directions and guidelines issued by the Supreme Cpurt in Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others which has been followed by this Court in Narendra DehariYa v. State of Chhattisaarh and others (1994V 6SCC 241. 4. The aforesaid issue came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in Narendra Dehariya (supra) and other connected matters wherein it was observed as under: "Thereafter the Government has issued another order dated 27.6.2007 wherein definition of bona fide residents of Chhattisgarh has been defined and explained wNch in'ciudesto person belonging to the central services posted l^^j •t%?€"f ^.-^y ? ^ -2-- 3) at Chhattisgarh, their spouses or children' (ii) all the employees of State of Chhattisgarh, their spouses or children; (iii) persons appointed on Constitutional or statutory posts by President of India, their spouses or children; (iv) Corporations, Agencies, Commissions, Board's officials/officers/employees, their spouses or children. This Governmentorderis to benefit the petitioners students with respect to bona fide residents of Chhattisgarh We are of the considered opinion that once such persons have been recognized as residents of Chhattisgarh, then the same analogy shall apply for the purpose of admission of children of the categories referred to hereinabove are concemed, if their caste is included in the Presidential order." 5. The said order has neither been amended nor modified nor set aside by the superior court. The same remains as it is. 6. Having regard to the above stated observations and directions passed by this Court in Narendra Dehariya (supra) the respondent No.3 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, without insisting on production of the land records prior to the year 1950, as land-records alone are not the requirement. 7. Till the appropriate order is passed by respondent No.3, status quo with respect to employment of the petitioner shall be maintained. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. r i sd/:. i PritinkerDiwaker Judge ^y..