Allowed

E S Nagaraj v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Oct 2022WP/5595/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition seeking to quash an order remanding a caste certificate matter to the District Caste Verification Committee for review. The Court held that the Committee lacked statutory power to review its own final order.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 16.02.2019 of the 2nd respondent remanding the matter to the 3rd respondent for reconsideration was quashed.

E S Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 5595 OF 2020 (GM-CC)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

E.S. NAGARAJ, S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA, AGED 54 YEARS, ASSISTANT TEACHER, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, RANGENAHALLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 144.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P H., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶11

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER FOR BACKWARD CLASSES DEPARTMENT AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR VERIFICATION OF CASTE AND INCOME CERTIFICATES, NO.16, D.DEVARAJ URS BHAWAN, MILLERS TANK BED AREA, VASANTHANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 052.

¶13

¶14

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT LEVEL BACKWARD CLASSES CASTE AND INCOME CERTIFICATE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶16

MEMBER SECRETARY AND DISTRICT OFFICER, BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION, PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER DATED 16.02.2019 BEARING NO.HimVaE/MaSha/CR-15/200405 VIDE ANENXRUE-D PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO REMANDING THE MATTER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT AUTHORITY FOR RECONSIDERATION.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶23

petitioner.

¶24

The petitioner is before this Court calling in

¶25

question the Order dated 16.02.2019 passed by the 2nd

¶26

¶27

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶28

respondent in so far as it relates to remanding the matter back to the hands of the 3rd respondent for

¶29

reconsideration.

¶30

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issue in this petition is covered by the judgment of the division bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.604/2007 disposed of on 26.11.2012 in the case of V.S. Bali Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and Another. The Division bench has held as follows :

¶31

"This intra-Court appeal is filed against the order dated 2nd March 2007 passed in Writ Petition No.2860/2003 (GM-CC). This appeal is filed by the writ petitioner. He is working as an officer of the 1st respondent - bank. The appellant joined the services of the 1st respondent - bank by producing the Caste Certificate, which discloses that he belongs to 'Gonda' community i.e., Scheduled Tribe. Thereafter he continued in the job. Based on certain complaints, the District Caste Verification Committee conducted the enquiry. After holding enquiry, the District Caste Verification Committee issued the Caste Certificate confirming the caste as 'Gonda' i.e., Scheduled Tribe. On receiving further

¶32

¶33

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶34

complaints, one more enquiry started against the petitioner and ultimately the order at Annexure-K produced alongwith the writ petition came to be passed to the effect that the appellant belongs to 'Kuruba' community and comes under Category-2A. Pursuant to the order Annexure-K, the bank issued the order at Annexure-J intimating the petitioner that he is coming under general category. Annexures-J and K were questioned before the learned Single Judge by filing the writ petition. The learned Single Judge though has quashed Annexures-J and K by concluding that unless the statute provides for such a review, the question of reconsidering or re-opening the case and coming to a different conclusion is unwarranted, has remanded the matter to the District Caste Verification Committee for enquiry once again. The order of remand is questioned in this writ appeal.

¶35

3. The Scheme of the Act i.e. the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990 does not provide for review of the order passed by the District Caste Verification Committee. Section - 4A of the Act lays down that the Tahsildar shall issue a caste certificate in respect of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or other backward classes. Section - 4C of the Act speaks of constitution of Caste Verification Committees for each district for verification of Caste Certificates issued under Section 4-A. Section - 4C (ii) states that the Caste Verification Committee may after holding such inquiry as it deems fit within 30 days

¶36

¶37

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶38

from the date of application either grant a validity certificate in a prescribed form or reject the application. Section 4D provides for appeal against the order of the Caste Verification Committee passed under Section 4C. Rules made under the said Act called the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes (Reservation of Appointments etc.,) Rules, 1992 stipulate the procedure for verification of case status and issue of validity certificate. Neither the Act nor the Rules made thereunder confer any power on the Committee to review its own order. Aggrieved party may file appeal as per law.

¶39

4. The Caste Verification Committee being the quasi judicial authority should follow the rules. Unless the review is provided by the statute, the power of review should not be enforced. In the matter on hand, on the basis of the evidence adduced in the enquiry, at the first instance, the Caste Verification Committee by the order dated 8.6.1998 held that the appellant belongs to 'Gonda' caste and that the Caste Certificate issued by the Tahsildar is valid and consequently issued validity certificate on 8.6.1998. On the basis of the same, the disciplinary proceedings against the appellant were dropped by the order dated 15.7.1998 by the bank. By an order dated 4.8.1998, the appellant was promoted as an officer with retrospective effect. Thereafter he was promoted as Manager in the Middle Management GradeII. Thereafter one more enquiry was held against the appellant based on another complaint. Neither the Act nor the rules made thereunder bestow any power of

¶40

¶41

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶42

review on the committee. The committee becomes functus officio, the moment it ordered on 8.6.1998 that the appellant belongs to 'gonda' community and issued Validity Certificate. Thereafter the committee did not have any authority in law whatsoever to pass the impugned order after five years. Even otherwise, the subsequent proceedings based on the 2nd complaint are not only without authority of law, but are without holding enquiry.

¶43

6. Though the learned Single Judge is justified in setting aside the impugned orders Annexures-J and K, is not justified in remanding the matter to the committe. The Act and the Rules framed thereunder did not provide power to review. The Courts could not have remitted the matter directing the District Caste Verification Committee to review its earlier order. Hence the impugned order insofar as it relates to remanding the matter stands quashed. In all other respects, the order of the learned Single Judge particularly, quashing Annexures-J and K stands confirmed."

¶44

3. Learned AGA though would seek to refute the

¶45

submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶46

but is not in a position to dispute the position of the law as is laid down by this Court. In the light of the issue being

¶47

¶48

WP No. 5595 of 2020

¶49

covered by the judgment of the Division bench on all its

¶50

fours, the petition deserves to succeed.

¶51

Hence, I pass the following :

¶52

ORDER

¶53

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶54

(ii) The order dated 16.02.2019 bearing No.HimVaE/MaSha/CR-15/2004-05 vide Annexure-D

¶55

passed by the 2nd respondent Authority is quashed, in so

¶56

far it pertains to remanding the matter to the hands of 3rd

¶57

respondent by the 2nd respondent.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

SNC

E S Nagaraj v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E S Nagaraj v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Vimala Ramanath Pawar Vs Senior Manager, Centralised Pension Processing Centre

M/S Vensa -Tsr (Jv) Vs South Western Railway

Bydarahally Milk Producer Co-Operative Society Limited (R) Vs State of Karnataka

Ocean Protiens Pvt. Ltd., Vs Marine Products Export Development Authority

M/S Ntc Exim India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Corporation Bank

Sri Y Shivakumar Vs Smt Chandrakala