Dismissed

Pankaj Kumar Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC7 Mar 2022WPS/2891/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner's appointment as a Shiksha Karmi. The court held there was no illegality in cancelling the appointment because the petitioner failed to submit a duly verified caste certificate despite the specific condition in the appointment order. No merit was found in the plea regarding alternative remedies

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Pankaj Kumar Baghel Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. — Caste Atrocities | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 2891 of 2012

¶5

Pankaj Kumar Baghel S/o Shri H.S.Baghel, aged about 31 years, R/o Bade Arapur, Tahsil Tokapal, District Bastar (CG)

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through-Secretary, Department of Panchayat, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (CG)

¶9

Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (CG)

¶10

Collector Bastar, District Jagdalpur (CG)

¶11

Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Darbha District Bastar (CG)

¶12

High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee through its Secretary, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Campus, Raipur (CG)

¶13

Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Social Welfare, New Delhi.

¶14

---- Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.1 to 3 & 5 : Mr. Ali Asgar, Dy. Advocate General For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate

¶16

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board

¶17

7.3.2022

¶18

Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 7.1.2012 (Annexure P-1) by which respondent No.4 has cancelled appointment order of petitioner on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III. Petitioner sought for following reliefs:-

¶19

“10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 07/01/2012 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent no.4 cancelling the appointment of the petitioner.

¶20

10.2. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.5 High Power Caste Scrutiny

¶21

¶22

Committee to verify the caste of the petitioner.

¶23

10.3. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to pay the salary of the petitioner from 21/02/2011 to 6/10/2012 the period during which the petitioner has served the department.

¶24

10.4.That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner from the date of his cancellation of appointment with back wages.

¶25

10.5. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any appropriate order including cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.”

¶26

Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that pursuant to advertisement issued by respondent No.4, petitioner applied for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III in reserved category of Scheduled Caste. After due procedure, petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III vide order dated 11.2.2011. Appointment order of petitioner contains a condition that any candidate appointed in reserved category shall necessarily submit Caste Certificate duly verified by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee within specified time. When petitioner approached respondent No.5-High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification of his caste certificate, he was not provided with requisite Form, therefore, verification could not be done. Petitioner submitted an application before respondent No.4 seeking extension of time to submit duly verified caste certificate. But, instead of granting time, respondent No.4 erroneously cancelled appointment order of petitioner. He contended that the State authorities have forwarded a memo to

¶27

¶28

the Central Government for including caste 'Mahara' in the Presidential Notification to be a caste in category of Scheduled Caste, which is pending consideration. Considering the pendency of application/request, State Government vide order dated 31.8.2009 extended time limit upto March, 2010 for submission of caste certificate duly verified by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (respondent No.5) by candidates appointed in various departments of the State Government earlier. Hence, the respondent authority concerned ought to have granted further time to petitioner for submitting verified caste certificate. Respondent No.4 in an illegal and arbitrary manner cancelled appointment of petitioner.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State would submit that petitioner submitted his application Form for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III as a Scheduled Caste candidate and after his selection, appointment order was issued in his favour on 11.2.2011. Condition No.9 of appointment order specifically prescribes for submission of caste certificate duly verified by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee within three months, failing whereof would entail to cancellation of appointment order itself. Accepting terms and conditions of appointment order, petitioner joined service on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III as a scheduled caste candidate. At the time of joining service, petitioner also submitted affidavit dated 21.2.2011 (Annexure P-11) to the effect that he will submit duly verified caste certificate within a period of three months and in case of his failure to submit duly

¶30

¶31

verified caste certificate, he would face consequences of cancellation of appointment. It is contended that request for inclusion of 'Mahara' caste along with other phonetic word 'Mahaar' in Scheduled Caste category is forwarded to the Central Government, but till date said request is pending consideration. He submits that contention of petitioner that respondent No.5 is not providing him requisite Form to be submitted for verification of caste certificate is not correct because respondent No.5 after perusal of caste certificate is obliged to provide requisite Form to be submitted by a candidate for verification of his caste and based on material placed on record along with application Form, respondent No.5Committee is bound to verify caste status and pass necessary orders. He pointed out that even after filing of writ petition, the petitioner could not get his caste status verified by respondent No.5-Committee. Hence, there is no merit in present petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶32

Adopting submissions of learned State Counsel, learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that in Clause-9 of appointment order there is specific mention regarding submission of duly verified caste certificate. At the time of joining service based on appointment order, petitioner submitted affidavit dated 21.2.2011 to the effect that he will submit relevant document i.e. verified caste certificate within a period of three months, but even after lapse of more than ten months' time, he could not able to submit verified caste certificate. Hence, respondent No.4 cancelled his appointment on the post

¶33

¶34

of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III for non-compliance of terms and conditions of appointment order, which cannot be said to be illegal. He also pointed out that order cancelling appointment of petitioner is passed by the Chief Executive Officer. As per provisions of Rule 13 of the CG Shiksha Karmi Rules, 2007 read with Section 91 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and Rules 3 & 5 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995, alternative remedy of filing of appeal and thereafter revision is available to petitioner. Hence, writ petition is also not maintainable in view of availability of alternative remedy.

¶35

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the impugned order and other documents available on record.

¶36

It is not in dispute that appointment order issued to petitioner on 11.2.2012 mentions specific condition under Clause-9 wherein selected candidate has to submit affidavit that he/she will, within a period of three months, necessarily submit Caste Certificate duly verified by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee. Relevant portion of Clause-9 of appointment order reads thus;-

¶37

“9........vH;FkhZ }kjk izLrqr tkfr izek.k i= ds fy;s mPp Lrjh; tkfr izek.ki= Nkuchu lfefr ls izek.k i= izLrqr djus fo"k;d 'kiFki= ds vk/kkj ij varfje :i ls 03 ekg ds fy, fu;qfDr dh tk jgh gSA le; lhek esa Nkuchu mijkar izek.k i= izLrqr ugh s a djus ij ;g fu;qfDr insu lekIr gks tkosxhA rc rd osru izkIr djus dh ik=rk ughs gksxhA”

¶38

Appointment order was accepted by petitioner and in compliance thereof submitted affidavit and joined on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III as interim measure for three months.

¶39

¶40

It is not the case of petitioner that there is no such requirement in advertisement nor copy of advertisement is placed on record. Appointment order bears specific clause of requirement to produce duly verified caste certificate. Hence, once petitioner accepted order of appointment containing specific terms and conditions, it was obligatory on the part of petitioner to comply with the same and submit caste certificate duly verified by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee. But, petitioner failed to produce duly verified caste certificate before respondent No.4. Furthermore, learned counsel for petitioner could not able to point out from the documents placed on record or convince this Court that based on request made by the State Government, 'Mahara' caste has been included in Presidential List notified under Article 341 of the Constitution of India as a caste in category of Scheduled Caste. Hence, in the above facts of the case where petitioner was appointed on the post reserved for Scheduled Caste but failed to produce duly verified caste certificate, I do not find any illegality or error in cancelling the order of his appointment vide Annexure P-1.

¶41

For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, it is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.

¶42

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶43

roshan/-

Pankaj Kumar Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mahima Sharma Vs Gaurav Tyagi

Shiv Kumar Adile and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kejharam Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

R.S.Rathore Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Jeevan @ Chhotu Sahu @ Jeevan Lal Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganeshi Bai Vs National Insurance Company Limited