Allowed

Panduranga v. the Director of Scheduled Tribe

Karnataka HC29 Oct 2022WP/10108/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the legality of an order declining Scheduled Tribe status based on non-compliance of procedural rules. The High Court quashed the impugned orders, holding that the order was unsustainable as it was not signed by all committee members as required by Rule 4 of the relevant 1992 Rules.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 07/02/2002 and 09/01/2011 quashed; matter remanded to District Caste Verification Committee to pass appropriate orders following Rule 4 procedure.

Panduranga Vs the Director of Scheduled… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.10108/2011 (GM-CC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

PANDURANGA, S/O. KALOJI RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, WORKING AS POST MASTER, MULKI POST OFFICE, R/O. KOLLUR VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK DISTRICT: MANGALORE.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULED TRIBE WELFARE AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KRISHI BHAVAN, 2^ND FLOOR, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶12

THE DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE, BY ITS PRESIDENT, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SOUTH KANARA, MANGALORE.

¶13

THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER AND MEMBER, CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE, SOUTH CANARA, MANGALORE.

¶14

¶15

THE TAHASILDAR & MEMBER, DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE, SOUTH CANARA, MANGALORE. ... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI C. JAGADISH, SPL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS & QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.02.2002 BY THE R2 AS PER ANNEXURE–S; AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.01.2011, PASSED BY THE R-1 AS PER ANNEXURE–T.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The present writ petition is filed questioning the legality and correctness of the order dated 07/02/2002, in No.G SA KAA:TA SA:CR:75/2001-02 as per Annexure – S, passed by 2^nd respondent and quash the order dated 19/01/2011 passed by 1^st respondent, in Appeal No.DSTW/Appeal/CR-13/2004 as per Annexure – T.

¶21

¶22

Brief facts arising in this writ petition are

¶23

that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Kollur Village, Mulki Hobli, Mangalore and belongs to “Marati” Community, which is classified as Scheduled Tribe in South Canara District. According to the petitioner, the notification clearly indicates that “Marati” caste in South Canara District is classified as Scheduled Tribe as per the Notification dated 11/12/1986 issued by Government of Karnataka, Social Welfare and Labour Department. It is stated by the petitioner that Tahsildar, Mangalore by its certificate dated 29/03/1999 has declared the petitioner as the person belonging to ‘Marati Community’, a Scheduled Tribe of Dakshina Kannada (South Canara) Karnataka. It is further stated that the certificate has also been issued by the Head Master of the High School stating that the petitioner belongs to ‘Marati Community’ which is a Scheduled Tribe of Dakshina Kannada (South Canara)

¶24

¶25

and the respondent authorities also issued certificate to family and relatives of the petitioner to the effect that they belong to ‘Marati’ Community a Scheduled Tribe of Dakshina Kannada (South Canara). This being the state of affairs, 2^nd respondent issued notice directing 3^rd respondent/Tahsildar to verify the caste of the petitioner. Subsequently, another notice was issued on 03/10/2001 by Social Welfare Department to appear before Caste Verification Committee for an enquiry on 28/01/2002 and accordingly statement of the petitioner was recorded. The Caste Verification Committee/2^nd respondent vide order dated 07/02/2002 held that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Marati’ Community a Scheduled Tribe in Dakshina Kannada (South Canara) Karnataka but belongs to ‘Maratha Kshatriya Community’ and is not entitled to the benefits available to Scheduled Tribe and directed the District Administrator to initiate the action.

¶26

¶27

Aggrieved by the order dated 07/02/2002 the petitioner preferred appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, since Divisional Commissioner came to be abolished, W.P. No.25658/2002 preferred before this Court and the same was disposed of with a direction to file an appeal within two months before the Director for Tribal Welfare, Bangalore.

¶28

The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the appellate authority-1^st respondent came to be dismissed and order of the Caste Verification Committee was upheld.

¶29

Aggrieved by the said orders, the

¶30

petitioners are before this Court.

¶31

Heard Sri P. Prasanna Kumar, learned

¶32

counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.Jagadish, Special Government Advocate for respondents.

¶33

¶34

In addition to various grounds urged by

¶35

learned counsel in the petition, it is the contention of the learned counsel that materials furnished by the petitioner has not been considered while proceeding to hold enquiry under Rule 3A (3) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Community (Reservation of Appointments Etc.,) Rules, 1992 and procedure as envisaged in the said rules has not been followed before passing the said order. It is prime contention of learned counsel that all the members of the committee have not signed the order at Annexure-S and it is only the Chairman who has signed the order and would contend that the Rule 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Community (Reservation of Appointments Etc.,) Rules, 1992 enumerates that the Caste Verification Committee consisting of four members and all the

¶36

¶37

members need to sign the order. In view of this, it is contended that the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the appellate authority is not sustainable and thus sought to allow the petition.

¶38

Per contra, learned Special Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would justify the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner and the appellate authority and would contend that the petitioner belongs to the ‘Maratha Kshatriya Community’ and not ‘Marati Community' as sought by the petitioner and insofar as the order been signed by the Deputy Commissioner only, the same is not disputed by the learned counsel, however on merits, it is submitted that petitioner has not made out any case in interfering with orders. Accordingly, he seeks for dismissal of the petition.

¶39

¶40

Having heard learned counsel for the

¶41

parties, the only point that arises for consideration is:

¶42

“Whether the Deputy Commissioner has followed the Rules as contemplated under Rule 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment, etc.) Rules, 1992 enumerated to the Caste Verification Committee?

¶43

Rule 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment, etc.) Rules, 1992 reads as under:

¶44

“ 4. Caste Verification Committee. -(1) There shall be a committee called the Caste Verification Committee for each district to verify the caste certificate issued in respect of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The committee shall consist of the following members namely.-

¶45

(1) The Deputy Commissioner of the District who shall be the Chairman;

¶46

(2) The Deputy Secretary (Administration) of the Zilla Panchayat;

¶47

¶48

(3) The Tahsildar of Taluk;

¶49

(4) The District Social Welfare Officer who shall be the Member Secretary:

¶50

[Provided that the State Government may constitute an Additional Caste Verification Committee for any District to verify the Caste Certificate issued in respect of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes which shall consist of the following members, namely. -

¶51

(i) An Officer not below the rank of Special Deputy Commissioner appointed by the State Government Chairman

¶52

(ii) The Assistant Commissioner of the Sub-Division Member

¶53

(iii) The Tahsildar of the Taluk Member

¶54

(iv)The District Social Welfare Officer Member.”

¶55

Perusal of Rule 4 of the said Rules clearly depicts

¶56

that the Deputy Commissioner, Deputy Secretary

¶57

(Administration), Tahsildar of Taluk and the District

¶58

Social Welfare Officer who is the Member Secretary are the members of Caste Verification Committee.

¶59

10 -

¶60

Perusal of the order dated 07/02/2002 at

¶61

Annexure – S, which is impugned order herein is signed only by the Deputy Commissioner and none other members of the Committee have signed the order, in view of the same, on the sole ground the order is not sustainable. This proposition is also squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court reported in the case of Janardhan

¶62

S. vs. The Deputy Commissioner & Chairman & others [W.P.No.46220/2019 disposed of on 14/10/2019] on similar terms which reads as under:

¶63

“8. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, though several contentions are raised by both the learned Counsel for the parties, the fact remains that the Deputy Commissioner has not followed the procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Rule 4 of the abovesaid Rules which reads as under:

¶64

11 -

¶65

4. Caste Verification Committee. -(1) There shall be a committee called the Caste Verification Committee for each district to verify the caste certificate issued in respect of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The committee shall consist of the following members namely.-

¶66

(1) The Deputy Commissioner of the District who shall be the Chairman;

¶67

(2) The Deputy Secretary (Administration) of the Zilla Panchayat;

¶68

(3) The Tahsildar of Taluk;

¶69

(4) The District Social Welfare Officer who shall be the Member Secretary:

¶70

¶71

(i) An Officer not below the rank of Special Deputy Commissioner appointed by the State Government - Chairman

¶72

12 -

¶73

(ii) The Assistant Commissioner of the SubDivision - Member

¶74

(iii) The Tahsildar of the Taluk - Member

¶75

(iv)The District Social Welfare Officer Member.”

¶76

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the impugned order is not signed by all the Members of the Committee and is not in compliance with the provisions of the Rules especially Rule 4 of the Rules, the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner alone and on the basis of which, the consequential order passed by the Tahsildar cannot be sustained.”

¶77

In light of the reasons stated supra and the

¶78

decision of the Co-Ordinate Bench, this Court pass the following:

¶79

ORDER

¶80

(i) Writ petition is allowed and the impugned

¶81

order dated 07/02/2002 passed by 2^nd respondent at Annexure – S and the consequential order dated 09/01/2011 at Annexure – T passed by 1^st respondent

¶82

13 -

¶83

are hereby quashed and the matter is remanded to the District Caste Verification Committee, South Canara, Mangalore, consisting of four members to pass appropriate orders in accordance with Rule 4 of the said Act and following the procedure as contemplated in the said Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Community (Reservation of Appointments Etc.,) Rules, 1992.

¶84

(ii) The petitioner is directed to appear before

¶85

the Committee on 21/11/2022 , who in turn shall fix

¶86

the date and time for hearing the petitioner and the matter be strictly considered in accordance with law without giving any further room for any adjudication and the petitioner shall co-operate with the Committee in disposing of the petition.

¶87

(iii) The Committee shall pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of

¶88