Read Time: 03 minutes

The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that a person is entitled to claim the benefit of reservation in either of the successor State of Bihar or State of Jharkhand but Would not be entitled to claim the privileges and benefits of reservation simultaneously in both the States.

A bench of Justice UU Lalit and Justice Ajay Rastogi while setting aside the Judgment of the Jharkhand High Court noted, "it will defeat the mandate of Articles 341(1) and 342(1) of 
the Constitution."

The batch petitions have been filed by a Combine Civil Services Examination and other similarly placed aspirants, one of whose name appeared on SL 5 out of 17 vacancies reserved for Scheduled Caste category, however, his appointment order was withheld and another person with lower merits in the category was appointed stating that his service book indicates that he is a permanent resident of District Patna in the State of Bihar is to be treated as a migrant to the State of Jharkhand. 

However, the bench observed that there is a fundamental dichotomy in the arguments made by the State of Jharkhand.

"Such of the persons whose place of origin/domicile on or before the appointed day was of the State of Bihar now falling within the districts/regions which form a successor State, i.e., State of Jharkhand under Section 3 of the Act, 2000 became an ordinary resident of the State of Jharkhand," the bench added.

Case Title- Pankaj Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors.