Allowed

Sri H v. Harish v the District Caste Verification Committee

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2022WP/83/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition filed by a retired engineer challenging a caste verification notice issued by the Civil Rights Enforcement Cell. The Court held the notice was without jurisdiction as no prior proceeding or order existed with the District Caste Verification Committee.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 05.12.2018 passed by the 3rd respondent stands quashed.

Sri H v Harish Vs the District Caste… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 83 OF 2019 (GM-CC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI H.V.HARISH S/O H.V. GIRIAPPA AGE ABOUT 64 YEARS, RETIRED SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, R/AT NO.717, SAPTHAGIRI, 2^ND FLOOR, WEST OF K.R.ROAD, BANASHANKARI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 070.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

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

¶13

THE DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MANGALURU, SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT.

¶14

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CRE CELL, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶15

¶16

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶17

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT CELL MANGALURU,

¶18

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT – 575 001.

¶19

THE TAHSILDAR T. NARASIPURA TALUK,

¶20

MYSURU DISTRICT – 570 001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. C.JAGADEESH, SPL. COUNSEL FOR R1 TO R3; SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R4)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS RELATING TO ISSUE OF THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 5.12.2018 ISSUED BY R-3 AT ANNEX-H AND AFTER PERUSAL SET ASIDE THE SAME.

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a notice issued by the Civil Rights Enforcement Cell/3^rd respondent herein directing the petitioner to appear before it for verification of his caste status.

¶27

Heard Sri.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.C.Jagadeesh, learned special counsel for

¶28

¶29

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶30

respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Smt.Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.4.

¶31

The petitioner, on 09.02.1978, secures a caste

¶32

certificate depicting him to be belonging to Nayak community which according to the learned counsel is declared to be a scheduled tribe. The petitioner then secures an employment on the strength of the caste certificate, as an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department. Based upon certain complaints with regard to his caste status being generated, a show cause notice comes to be issued against the petitioner to show cause as to why proceedings should not be instituted against him. The petitioner submits a reply on 28.3.1984 and the submission is is accepted and the matter was closed.

¶33

Five years thereafter, another notice comes to be issued on the very same ground which also comes to be closed. In the year 1990, the petitioner was denied promotion on the ground that a show cause notice dated 16.3.1989 was subsisting against him. Against denial of promotion, petitioner

¶34

¶35

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶36

approaches the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’ for short) in application No.1103/1991 challenging the said action of denial of promotion. The Tribunal disposes the application directing the department to extend the reservation benefit pending decision of the validity of the certificate by the District Caste Verification Committee. The said order comes to be passed on 19.04.1995.

¶37

It transpires that the District Caste Verification Committee till date has not issued any notice or taken up any proceeding against the petitioner. The petitioner retires from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.3.2014. After about 4 years of his retirement and 23 years of the passage of the order of the Tribunal, a notice comes to be issued not by the Committee, but by the 3^rd respondent/Civil Rights Enforcement Cell (‘CRE’ cell for short) directing him to appear for an enquiry with regard to his caste status on the basis of the complaint made by one of the employee of the Public Works Department. It is this notice that drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

¶38

¶39

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶40

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

¶41

contend that the notice issued is without jurisdiction as the power of the CRE cell to issue such notice is in terms of Rule 7(4) of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments etc.,) Rules, 1992 (‘Rules’ for short) and unless proceeding is taken up by the District Caste Verification Committee, the CRE cell would not get jurisdiction to entertain any such complaint or issue any such notice. He would place reliance upon the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.36702-718/2000 & connected cases and that of the Division Bench in W.A.No.7536/2001 & connected cases to buttress his submission that issuance of notice is without jurisdiction on the ground that the caste certificates issued prior to coming into force of the Act cannot be enquired into.

¶42

Learned counsel Sri.C.Jagadeesh appearing for the respondents would admit the position insofar as they concern Rule 7(4) of the Rules, but would submit that the judgments so relied on by the learned counsel for petitioner have all been

¶43

¶44

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶45

held to be not a good law in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of GEETHANJALI V. CANARA BANK reported in ILR 2012 KAR 4384 , wherein the Division Bench specifically considered this very point as to whether the caste certificate issued prior to coming into force of the Act could be enquired into or not and have thus held that the Committee has jurisdiction to do so. He would submit that the liberty be reserved to the CRE cell to take appropriate action in terms of the Act in the event the District Caste Verification Committee would initiate proceedings or pass any orders in accordance with law.

¶46

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record.

¶47

The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute and therefore are not reiterated. The CRE cell is empowered to act only in terms of Rule 7(4) of the Rules which reads as follows:

¶48

“….

¶49

¶50

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶51

(4) Where the Committee even after the enquiry referred to in sub-rules (2) and (3) finds that the claim is doubtful, and is not in a position to come to a conclusion it shall refer the matter to the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement for detailed investigation and report. On receipt of the report from the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement, the Committee shall dispose off the case on merit, after holding such enquiry as it deems fit and after giving the applicant an opportunity of being heard. An order under this sub-rule shall be made within one month from date of receipt of the application.”

¶52

In terms of Rules 7(4), the Civil Rights Enforcement Cell would get its right to issue notice and enquire into any caste status of any person only, pursuant to an order passed by the District Caste Verification Committee and cannot independently issue notice, without there being a proceeding or an order of the District Caste Verification Committee.

¶53

Admittedly, in the case at hand, the District Caste Verification Committee has not initiated any proceeding during the service of the petitioner. Therefore, the very notice is rendered without jurisdiction and if it is rendered without jurisdiction, it is necessarily to be obliterated.

¶54

¶55

WP No. 83 of 2019

¶56

Insofar as the submission of the learned counsel for

¶57

petitioner that the caste certificates issued prior to the Act coming into force cannot be enquired into by the District Caste Verification Committee is concerned, the same is untenable in the light of the subsequent judgment of the Division Bench in the case of GEETHANJALI (supra) . For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(i) Writ Petition is allowed.

¶60

(ii) Impugned order dated 05.12.2018 passed by the 3^rd respondent stands quashed.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

BKP

¶63

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

Sri H v. Harish v the District Caste Verification Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri H v. Harish v the District Caste Verification Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Creative Aromatics Specialties Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Megha Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Ltd.

Mrs Srirupa Roy Vs Union of India

Mrs. Rita Shantha Daniel Vs Joint Commissioner

M/S Universal Educational Trust Vs M/S Varthana Finance Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Golbal Traders Vs the Department of Backward Classes Development