Delhi High Court: A petition was filed by a minor seeking issuance of a Scheduled Caste certificate under the . Sanjeev Narula, J., directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation enclosing therewith all the relevant documents to support the application, including the caste certificate of his mother, and detailing the circumstances that entitle him to avail the benefit of the circulars dated 20-07-2020 and 13-07-2022.
The petitioner’s parents were married on 18-05-2005, and he was born on 07-10-2006. In 2009, the petitioner’s father abandoned the family without explanation and has not returned since. Subsequently, the petitioner’s father filed for divorce in 2011, which was later dismissed in default in 2014 due to his non-participation. The petitioner’s mother also lodged an FIR in 2011 alleging domestic abuse and criminal offences against the father, but the investigation remains pending. Over the past 15 years, the mother has single-handedly raised the petitioner.
Despite several attempts, the petitioner was unable to secure a caste certificate because the respondent authority insisted the application be made by the father. The mother’s efforts to utilize circulars issued in 2020 and 2022, which allow for the issuance of caste certificates to children of single, separated, or divorced women, were also rejected on the ground that she lacked a formal decree of divorce or separation.
After exhausting all administrative remedies, the petitioner approached the Court, contending that the refusal to issue the caste certificate was arbitrary and contrary to the intent of the circulars. The petitioner argued that the prolonged abandonment of the family by the father constituted a de facto separation, and the denial of the certificate solely on the absence of legal documentation was a violation of his rights.
The Court recognized that the petitioner’s mother had been abandoned by her husband for over 15 years, during which she had taken sole responsibility for raising the petitioner. It noted that the respondent’s interpretation of the term “separated” in the circulars was unduly restrictive and ignored the lived realities of families like the petitioner’s.
Thus, the Court concluded that requiring a formal decree of divorce or judicial separation placed undue emphasis on form over substance. It emphasized that the circulars were intended to benefit children in precarious familial situations, including those of women abandoned by their spouses. The petitioner’s prolonged abandonment by his father was deemed equivalent to a separation in every meaningful sense.
The Court also highlighted that the petitioner’s mother had already been recognized as a member of the SC community, and denying the petitioner a caste certificate solely because of his father’s abandonment would defeat the purpose of the circulars. The respondent’s insistence on rigid formalities was held to be untenable and contrary to principles of equity and justice.
The Court allowed the petition, issuing the following directions:
The petitioner was directed to submit a fresh representation with all relevant documents, including his mother’s caste certificate and details of the circumstances justifying his claim under the circulars.
The respondent was instructed to examine the application on its merits within two weeks, without rejecting it solely on the ground that the petitioner’s mother lacked a formal decree of divorce or separation. The court directed the respondent to consider the factual reality of the abandonment as tantamount to separation.
[Deep Minor v GNCTD, W.P.(C) 9141/2023, decided on 17-12-2024]
Judgment by: Justice Sanjeev Narula
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj and Ms. Shagun Agarwal, Advocates for petitioner
Mr. Prashant Manchanda, ASC with Ms. Nancy Shah and Ms. Isha Baloni, Advocates for GNCTD.
The post appeared first on .