STATE OF UTTARAKHAND vs PRADEEP SINGH

Court
Uttarakhand High Court

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
AND
HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY


02 NOVEMBER, 2026


SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2023

State of Uttarakhand and others --Appellants
Versus
Upma Bharti --Respondent
With
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 298 OF 2023
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 302 OF 2023
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 305 OF 2023
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 300 OF 2023
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 306 OF 2023


Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Adtiya Singh, learned counsel for
the State of Uttarakhand/appellants.
Counsel for respondents : Mr. Shivanand Bhatt and Mr. B.M.
Pingal, learned counsel.

JUDGMENT : ( per Shri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, A.C.J.)


Delay Condonation Applications (IA/1/2023)
Reasons furnished in Delay Condonation
Applications are sufficient to condone the delay in filing
these Special Appeals. Accordingly, Delay Condonation
Application are allowed and the delay in filing the
Special Appeals is condoned.
2. Since common questions of law and fact are
involved in these intra court appeals, therefore, they
are clubbed together and are being heard & decided by
a common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity,
1

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

facts of Special Appeal No. 303 of 2023 alone are being
considered and discussed.
3. Respondent (Km. Upma Bharti) applied for
caste certificate by contending that she belongs to
Jatav community, which is recognized as Scheduled
Caste in State of Uttarakhand. Her application was
rejected on the ground that evidence in support of her
claim as per Government Order, is not enclosed. Thus,
feeling aggrieved, she filed Writ Petition (M/S) No.
3710 of 2018, challenging the rejection order. She also
sought a direction to the competent authority to issue
caste certificate in her favour.
4. Her writ petition was allowed by learned
Singh Judge, vide judgment dated 11.03.2019, which is
under challenge in this appeal. Relevant extract of that
judgment is reproduced below:-
“The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of non grant of castes
certificate. Because, according to the contention of the
petitioner since she being a scheduled castes, she was entitled
for the caste certificate in the light of the said Government
Order and, particularly, stress has been made by the petitioner
to Sub-clause (vii) of Clause 4 of the Government Order dated
2nd April, 2013. Sub-clause (vii) of Clause 4 reads as under :-
(vii) tkfr izek.k&i= fuxZr djus dh n`f’V ls LFkk;h fuokl
(Permanent Resident) gh izklafxd gSA fuokl ds lEcU/k esa
vU; 'kCnksa tSls fuokl djrk gS (Resides), fuokl
(Residence), lkekU;r;k fuokl djrk gS (Ordinarily
Resides), lnHkkoh fuokl (Domicile) rFkk ewy fuoklh
(Original Resident) dks fopkj vkSj mi;ksx esa ugha fy;k tk;s%
It is not in dispute that the castes to which the petitioner
belongs, i.e. Jatav, is a castes which is notified as Scheduled
Castes in the State of Uttarakhand.
There is no doubt that permanent resident certificate has
already been issued in favour of the petitioner. The criteria for
the grant of castes certificate is contemplated under Sub-clause
(vii) of Clause 4, which provides basic foundation for the
purpose of issuance of caste certificates would be based upon
the permanent resident certificate, which has been issued by
the State Government in favour of the petitioner.
2

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

There is no doubt that in the instant case, the petitioner is the
holder of permanent resident certificates as per law. In that
eventuality, this Court is of the view that once the State, in
pursuance to the Government Order dated 2nd April, 2013, has
recognized the petitioner as to be the permanent resident as
per Clause (ii) to (vi), then in view of Subclause (vii) of Clause
4, they were equally bound to comply the condition contained
under Sub-clause (vii) of Clause 4 for the grant of castes
certificate, the basis of which, as per the Government Order
dated 02.04.2013 happens to be the permanent resident
certificate granted under the said Government Order applicable
in the State.
In view of the above, a writ of certiorari is issued and the
impugned order dated 29.09.2018, passed by respondent No. 3
rejecting the application of the petitioner for the grant of caste
certificate is quashed and a writ of mandamus is issued to the
respondent No. 3 to issue castes certificate in the light of the
provisions contained under the Government Order dated 2nd
April, 2013, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of certified copy of the order
Subject to the above observations, the writ petition stands
allowed.”

5. In connected appeals, similar writ petitions
filed by other persons were disposed of in terms of the
judgment rendered in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3710 of
2018. Interpretation of Government Order dated
02.04.2013 is involved in all the appeals, therefore,
they are decided together.
6. Learned Single Judge relied upon clause 4 of
the Government Order dated 02.04.2013 for allowing
the writ petition. The condition, which one is required
to meet for issuance of permanent resident certificate,
are enumerated in paragraph no. 4 of the said
Government Order and in clause (vii) of paragraph no.
4, it is provided that permanent residence of a person
alone would be relevant for issuing caste certificate to a
person. In paragraph no. 7 of the said Government
Order, however, it is mentioned that a person applying
for caste certificate will be required to submit an
affidavit stating that neither he nor any member of his
3

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

family has obtained caste certificate from other State
nor will they obtain such certificate from other State.
Such person is also required to state on oath that
neither he nor any member of his family is getting
benefit available to a reserved category person in any
other State.
7. Learned counsel for appellants submits that
learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by
relying on clause (vii) of paragraph no. 4 of
Government Order dated 02.04.2013, which merely
provides that while issuing caste certificate, permanent
residence of the person alone would be relevant. He
submits that clause (vii) of paragraph no. 4 was
misread by learned Single Judge, as laying down the
thumb rule that issuance of permanent resident
certificate will automatically result in issuance of caste
certificate, while as per the Government Order, one has
to meet other conditions before caste certificate can be
issued in his/her favour.
8. We find substance in the contention raised on
behalf of the appellant. Paragraph no. 4 of Government
Order dated 02.04.2013 deals with permanent
residence status in Uttarakhand and lays down the
conditions, which are to be met for issuance of
permanent resident certificate. Clause (vii) of
paragraph no. 4 merely provides that permanent
resident status of a person has to be seen before
issuing caste certificate in his favour.
4

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

9. Learned Single Judge has misread clause (vii)
for holding that whosoever holds a permanent resident
certificate, issued by competent authority in State of
Uttarakhand, can be issued a caste certificate, if he
belongs to a caste/community, which is identified as
SC/ST/OBC in the State.
10. A careful perusal of Government Order dated
02.04.2013 reveals that possession of permanent
resident certificate is one of the pre-requisite for
issuance of caste certificate in the State, however,
mere possession of permanent resident certificate will
not entitle a person to caste certificate, as was held by
learned Single Judge. A person has to meet other
conditions of eligibility, as mentioned in Government
Order dated 02.04.2013 and has also to submit
affidavit stating that neither he nor any member of his
family has obtained caste certificate from other State
nor will they apply for caste certificate in some other
State in future and further that neither the person
applying for caste certificate nor any other member of
his family has received any benefit available to
SC/ST/OBC in some other State.
11. The Government Order dated 02.04.2013 has
to be read as a composite-whole and paragraph no. 7
thereof could not have been overlooked while dealing
with paragraph no. 4 and its different clauses. In the
impugned judgment, however, paragraph no. 7 of the
Government Order has been completely overlooked
while holding that anyone with permanent resident
5

UKHC010130582023

2026:UHC:10054-DB

certificate is entitled for caste certificate, if he belongs
to a caste/community, which is recognized as
SC/ST/OBC in State of Uttarakhand.
12. As discussed above, learned Single Judge has
considered clause (vii) of paragraph no. 4 of
Government Order dated 02.04.2013 for allowing the
writ petition and has ignored paragraph no. 7 of the
said Government Order, therefore, the impugned
judgment dated 11.03.2019 is interferable.
13. Accordingly, the Special Appeals are allowed
and the impugned judgment is set-aside. Respondents,
however, shall be at liberty to apply for caste
certificate, afresh, in terms of Government Order dated
02.04.2013 and their applications, if submitted along
with affidavit in terms of Government Order dated
02.04.2013, shall be considered as per law, within four
months.
14. Pending Applications, if any, stand disposed
of.


_______________________
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, A.C.J.


___________________
SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

nd
Dt: 2 November, 2026
Navin

Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN
CHANDRA Date: 2026.11.05 19:11:58 +05'30'
NAVEEN CHANDRA
6