Dismissed

Karnataka Pradesha Banjara (Lambani) Seva Sangha (R) v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Dec 2024WP/33617/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Banjara/Lambani society challenged a State notification appointing a one-man commission to collect empirical data on Scheduled Castes, objecting to the use of the term 'Internal Reservation' instead of 'Sub Classification'. The court held the choice of words and terms of reference were exclusively within State discretion and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

None granted; writ petition dismissed.

Karnataka Pradesha Banjara (Lambani) Seva Sangha (R) Vs… — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:51225 WP No. 33617 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 33617 OF 2024 (SCST)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KARNATAKA PRADESHA BANJARA (LAMBANI) SEVA SANGHA (R) BANJARA BHAVAN NO.16K, MUILLER TANK BUND AREA QUEANS ROAD, VASANTHANAGAR BENGALURU 560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI N R NAIK

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.N.R.NAIK., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR BEEDI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶13

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SODUAH, AMBEDIKAR BEEDI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶14

THE JOINT SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE M.S BUILDING, AMBEKAR BEEDI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:51225 WP No. 33617 of 2024

¶18

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE M.S BUILDING, AMBEKAR BEEDI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶19

SRI H N NAGAMOHAN DAS HON’BLE RETIRED JUSTICE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560 001.

¶20

THE CHIAR PERSON STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTE STATE OF KARNATAKA NO. 14/3, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD NEAR RESERVE BANK AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-1 GO R-3)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO REMOVE THE WORD INTERNAL RESERVATION (OLAMISALATHI) AND TO INSERT SUB CLASSIFICATION (VARGIKARANA) WHEREVER IT APPEARS IN THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED IN NO. SWD/8/SLP/2024 (P-1) BENGALURU DATED: 12.11.2024 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D TO THE WRIT PETITION, ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:51225 WP No. 33617 of 2024

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The prayer in this writ petition is as follows:

¶30

“a) To direct the 3^rd respondent to remove the word Internal Reservation (M¼À«ÄÃ¸À¯Áw) and to insert Sub Classification (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt) wherever it appears in the Notification issued in No.SWD/8/SLP/2024 (P-1), Bengaluru dated 12.11.2024 which is produced at Annexure-D to the Writ Petition;

¶31

b) To issue appropriate direction to the respondent authorities collect the Empirical Data of each communities through the Administration of authorities like Tahasildar, PDO as the all 101 castes are residing in Karnataka State;

¶32

c) To call for records and grant such other relief/s deems fit by this Hon'ble court, in the interest of justice.”

¶33

By Annexure – D, the State Government has passed the order appointing one man commission in the following terms:

¶34

“ಪ��ಾ�ವ�ೆಯ�� ವ��ರುವ ಅಂಶಗಳ ��ೆ��ೆಯ��, ಕ�ಾ�ಟಕ �ಾಜ ದ�� "#ಣ ಮತು� ಸ(ಾ�� ೇ*ೆಗಳ�� ಪ�"ಷ, -ಾ.ಯ ��ಧ ಉಪ-ಾ.ಗ12ೆ �ೇ�ದವರ 3ಾ�.4ಧ 5ೆ ಕು�ತು Empirical Data ಪ6ೆದು ಪ�"ಷ, -ಾ.ಯ�� ಒಳ 8ೕಸ�ಾ. ಬ2ೆ:, ಸಕ; "<ಾರ�=ಗ>ೆ?ಂ@2ೆ ಎರಡು .ಂಗಳ ಅವCDಳ2ಾE

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:51225 WP No. 33617 of 2024

¶36

ವರ@ ಸ��ಸಲು ಆDೕಗ �HಾರIಾ (ಾJK 1952ರ (Commission of Inquiry Act 1952) ((ೇಂದ� (ಾJK ಸಂ.60) �ೆ#L (3)ರ�� 4ೕಡ�ಾದ ಅC(ಾರಗಳನು� ಚ�ಾO�, ಕ�ಾ�ಟಕ ಉಚP �ಾ Qಾಲಯದ 4ವೃತ� �ಾ QಾCೕಶ�ಾದ "�ೕ SೆT.ಎL.�ಾಗUೕಹL WಾX ಇವರ ಅಧ #5ೆಯ�� ಏಕ ಸದಸ ಆDೕಗವನು� ರ[ಸ�ಾEWೆ .

¶37

ಸದ� �HಾರIಾ ಆDೕಗದ The terms of references, ಕ\ೇ�, ಾಹನ ವ ವ�ೆ] ಅಗತ �ಬ^ಂ@, 2ೌರವಧನ ಮತು� ಇತರ ಸವಲತು�ಗಳನು� ಕ�`ಸುವ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಪ�5ೆ ೕಕಾE ಆWೇಶ Sೊರbಸ�ಾಗುವcದು.

¶38

ಈ ಆWೇಶವನು� ಸ[ವ ಸಂಪcಟ eಪ`f ಸಂgೆ :�.616/2024, @�ಾಂಕ:28-10-2024ರ 4ಣ�ಯದನhಯ ಈ ಆWೇಶ Sೊರbಸ�ಾEWೆ ”.

¶39

It is the contention of Sri.N.R.Naik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the Government ought not to have used the word ‘Internal Reservation’ and ought to have used the word ‘SubClassification’.

¶40

In my view, this argument cannot be accepted.

¶41

It is for the State to take steps in order to classify the caste (Scheduled Caste) as permitted by the

¶42

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:51225 WP No. 33617 of 2024

¶43

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The State of Punjab¹ . The petitioners who claim to be a Society cannot request the Government to omit a particular word or insert a particular word. The power to appoint a Commission and indicate the terms of reference is exclusively within the domain of the State and the petitioner would have no authority to question the same.

¶44

I am, therefore, of the view that there is no merit in this Writ Petition and the Writ Petition is, therefore,

¶45

dismissed.

¶46

SD/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

¶47

GSR/HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

¶48

1 The State of Punjab & Others v. Davinder Singh & Others, Civil Appeal No.2317/2011

Karnataka Pradesha Banjara (Lambani) Seva Sangha (R) v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Pradesha Banjara (Lambani) Seva Sangha (R) v. the 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Veeresh Vs Sri Nagaraja T H

Smt. Zahara Bathul Vs Divisional Controller, K S R T C

The Branch Manager Vs Maruthi D K

Smt Arjumanbhanu Vs Sri Syed Naveed Khadri

Smt.Supriya Vaidya Vs Sri.Pavan Gurunath Vaidya

Rajagopala K v Vs the State of Karnataka