Treating caste, husband's income while appointing teachers contrary to law: Karnataka HC

The selecting authority should consider the applications of the petitioners, based on the caste and income certificates of the parents and not their spouses, ruled HC
Photo of Karnataka High Court | Pic: Express
Photo of Karnataka High Court | Pic: Express

The Karnataka High Court ruled that the selection authority, the Deputy Director of Public Instructions (DDPI), went contrary to the law by considering the caste and income of the husband when appointing teachers, rejecting the state government's argument that only the spouse's caste and income should be taken into account.

The petitioners' applications should be evaluated based on the caste and income certificates of their parents, not their spouses, and as belonging to the specific categories against which they have applied, according to the order issued by Justice M Nagaprasanna.

However, Akshata Chougala and 20 other female candidate-petitioners were treated as general merit candidates when they applied for the positions of Graduate Primary Teachers for Classes VI to VIII in 2022. They also submitted the father's caste and income certificates. The applicants were qualified for reservations under Categories 2A, 2B, 3A, and 3B, which make up the majority of reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBC). Since they were married, they contested being treated as general merit candidates. Allowing the petition, the court said, "The provisional select list insofar as it relates to the petitioners being brought under the general merit category is quashed. The petitioners shall be treated as belonging to the categories to which they had applied, qua the caste and income certificates appended to the applications," stated a report by The New Indian Express.

The certificates followed the law exactly. The DDPI contended that once the daughter marries, the income of the spouse must be taken into account for caste and income certificates rather than that of the parents, in accordance with a government order dated December 12, 1986. The court rejected the state's argument that once a daughter marries, she loses her dependency on her parents, as reported by The New Indian Express.

Related Stories

No stories found.