Backword class 2A certificate in Karnataka
1 year ago
I Karnataka government issues 2A certificate which is equivalent to OBC certificate in center. I am married Woman, when I apply for the backward class 2A certificate they rejected my application saying parents income can not be considered and I should go with my husbands income. I questioned this saying as per central OBC rule creamy layer is defined by Parents status not from spouses. Then they showed me a document from 1986, which roughly translates to if in case of married women her creamy layer status has to be decided by Her husbands income. Is this correct? Can some learned people help me here. Can state have that kind of policy which is contradicting to Central rule. Also what is some one wants both central OBC and 2A certificates ? If what they follow here in case of married woman is not correct. How can i challenge this. Whom to approach, Is there an easy way to approach any court. Kindly help me with the procedure, if some one could help here.
The creamy layer is based on the status of your parents.
The government had stipulated that it would be revised every three years and September 13, 2017 (Rs 8 lakh) was the last revision and it is now more than three years since the last revision. If the notifications of Central and State are contradicting each other, then the Central rules will prevail over the state rules. However you can file a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court to move with the same legally.
If contradictory opinions prevail then the latest will prevail and the circulars issued by Central Government will prevail over State Government circulars. You have a good case to get positive result if you go to High Court.
For getting non creamy layer certificate for OBC the criteria is that the family income should be upto certain level and usually these benefits are taken by students for admission to colleges or job hence here family income includes the father's income.
Once a girl gets married then her family means with and includes the husband and not father. So, even if the rule is not very clear but I guess the income of the husband should be considered