The Bombay High Court recently (WRIT PETITION NO. 9528 OF 2017 Mrs. Anuradha Sudhakar Katkar Vs Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Solapur, Ambedkar Bhawan Satrasta, Solapur & Ors.) held that " a married woman cannot by relying on her husband’s caste claim entitlement to contest election for the seat reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate."
In the present case the Petitioner has been elected as a candidate in the election of the Solapur Municipal Corporation. The Petitioner had contested the election as candidate of Congress party for the seat available for OBC category. The Petitioner at the time of filling election form, submitted the documents in support of her caste case claiming as “Tambat” OBC on the basis of her husband's caste and not her father's caste. The Petitioner's election form was accordingly accepted. The Petitioner upon submitting her caste claim as Tambat OBC had been elected as Corporator of Solapur Municipal Corporation in the election conducted in February 2017.
The Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee had thereafter directed the Petitioner to submit the caste of her father's side and accordingly, the Petitioner had submitted the documents of her father's side which supported the caste claim of “Lohar NT”.
On 10 March 2017 the State Election Commission informed the Secretary of Town Planning Department, Mantralaya that the orders regarding cancellation of election of a candidate should be passed with retrospective effect.
However, due to non-availability of members of the scrutiny committee, no decision regarding the caste claim of the petitioner was taken. Consequently, the said writ petition was filed.
While deciding the case the court came to a finding that
"the issue of whether a woman by virtue of her marriage can rely upon her husband’s caste and claim entitlement to the benefit of reservation as a Scheduled Castes and/or be entitled to contest the election for the seat reserved for a Scheduled Castes candidate has been answered by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court in Meera Kanwaria Vs.
Sunita & Ors(2006(1) SCC 344) relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mrs. Valsamma Paul v. Cochin University and Others (1996)3 SCC 545 after reviewing the entire law on the subject in paragraph 24, held thus:
“It is, therefore, beyond any doubt or dispute that a person who is a high caste Hindu and not subjected to any social or educational or backwardness in his life, by reason of marriage alone cannot ipso facto become a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. In the absence of any strict proof he cannot be allowed to defeat the very provisions made by the reserving certain seats for disadvantaged people.”
Thus observed
" It is thus clear that a married woman cannot by relying on her husband’s caste claim entitlement to contest election for the seat reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate."
And held that
" the Petitioner has been wrongfully elected as Corporator based on the caste case from her husband's side and the Petition deserves to be dismissed, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Meera Kanwaria (supra) "
