M.KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, J. - (1.) IN both these petitions, following common questions have arisen for consideration: (1) Whether a Tribal lady, who got married with non -tribal husband, may continue to get reservation under Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution ? (2) Whether the admission of Sneha Salila, respondent No. 6, in the medical college in M.B.B.S course, whose father was not a member of Scheduled Tribe community, is liable to be cancelled and the petitioner, who is a daughter of the Tribal couple, is entitled to the said seat in M.B.B.S course ?
(2.) THE short facts leading to filing of this writ petition are as follows: Savita Bala Tuti, the petitioner, was born in Ranchi on 12.2.1986. She studied in Loreto Convent, Ranchi, a very reputed school, and passed the School Final with high first class in I.C.S.E. in 2002. The petitioner's father, Jagpati Tuti, belongs to a very interior village of Khunti, Ranchi District. He belongs to Munda community, Scheduled Tribe. Similarly, petitioner's mother, Sashi Bala Tuti, Munda, also belongs to the same Munda community. The petitioner is born and brought up in Patra Toli, Namkom, Khijri. Since the petitioner belongs to Khunti originally due to her father's native place, she sought the Caste Certificate and Residence Certificate from the Welfare Department. Accordingly, S.D.O, Khunti, issued a Residence Certificate as well as Caste Certificate showing the petitioner as a Member of Munda, Scheduled Tribe Community. The petitioner, after passing the Intermediate Course from St. Xavier's School, Ranchi, appeared in the Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination, 2006. She passed preliminary Examination and thereafter she was allowed to appear in the Main Examination. In that Main Examination also, she passed. Then she was asked to appear before the Counseling Board. Accordingly she appeared and showed the certificates. Though she could not compete on the basis of her marks obtained as a General Candidate for admission in M.B.B.S Course, she became eligible for admission in the M.B.B.S Course as a candidate of reserved/privileged Scheduled Tribe community. From Serial No. 1 to 44, admissions had been given to M.B.B.S Course. Petitioner's name appeared after 44th candidate, i.e. at serial No. 45. At that point of time, she came to know that 6th respondent, Sneh Salila, obtained a Caste Certificate from Gumla to the effect that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe community and on that basis she was given admission in 1st Year M.B.B.S Course in R.I.M.S, Ranchi, by entering her name within serial No. 1 to 44. Admission was given only on the basis of the said certificate, but the said certificate was a fake certificate since her father and mother are belonging to different communities. The mother of the 6th respondent alone belongs to Scheduled Tribe and admittedly her father belongs to Scheduled Caste. The fake certificate of that kind was issued only on the basis of the fact that the mother belongs to Scheduled Tribe. Therefore, she gave the protest petition to S.D.O., Gumla, for cancellation of the Caste Certificate of the 6th respondent. The members of the Scheduled Tribe have been given 26% reservation in Jharkhand in the matter of admission in the educational institutions. 19 seats have been allotted to the Scheduled Tribes Community in R.I.M.S and 6th respondent was treated as the 19th candidate. Since the petitioner had fallen at serial No. 45, she was not given M.B.B.S course. On the other hand, she was sent to the Dental Medical College, Patna. It was claimed in the protest petition that the caste shall be determined on the basis of the father's caste and not on the basis of the caste of the mother. Since father of the respondent No. 6 belongs to another State and he does not belong to Scheduled Tribe, respondent No. 6 cannot be given admission on the basis of fake certificate and on the other hand, the petitioner is entitled for admission as she belongs to this State and she is the daughter of a tribal couple. However, the protest petition was rejected. Under those circumstances, she was constrained to file this writ petition seeking for the direction to cancel the admission of respondent No. 6 on the basis of fake certificate and in her place she may be allowed to be admitted in M.B.B.S course. The gist of the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners in the writ petitions is as follows Sneh Salila, 6th respondent, has been issued the certificate by the S.D.O stating that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe community. It is a fake certificate issued to her. It has been clearly established that the father of 6th respondent belongs to another State and does not belong to Jharkhand State. Similarly, it is not disputed that the 6th respondent's father did not belong to Scheduled Tribe, but the certificate is issued to the 6th respondent on the basis of the certificate issued to the effect that her mother belonged to Oraon community. The fake community certificate was issued in favour of the 6th respondent that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe. The members of the community have been classified as Scheduled Tribe, Scheduled Caste and backward. The members of the Scheduled Tribe have been given 26% reservation in Jharkhand in the matter of admission in the educational institutions. The members of the Scheduled Caste have been given 10% reservation. The basis of the determination of minority community or a caste is the State only and not the entire nation. The father of the 6th respondent is admittedly not a member of the Scheduled Tribe, nor does he belong to Jharkhand State. On the other hand, admittedly petitioner's father and mother both belonged to Scheduled Tribe and both belonged to Jharkhand State. As per the reservation, which is 26% for Scheduled Tribe, the petitioner is entitled to get the seat. On the other hand, 6th respondent obtained a seat in 26% reserved seat on the basis of fake certificate that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe. Therefore, the admission given to 6th respondent is to be cancelled and in that place, the petitioner, who was born to the tribal couple, is to be admitted.
(3.) THE entire argument made by the counsel for the petitioner is on the strength of the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Anjan Kumar V/s. Union of India and Ors. 2006 AIR SCW 888.;