Dr G Manjunath Vs the Chairman and Deputy Commissioner

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 22459 OF 2021 (GM-CC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

DR. G. MANJUNATH S/O GANGAPATI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, WORKING AS AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, DUGGASANDRA RAITHA SAMPARKA KENDRA, MULUBAGILU TALUK, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF: AARIKUNTE VILLAGE, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. KASHINATH J.D., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE CHAIRMAN AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR TOWN-563101.

¶14

THE MEMBER SECRETARY AND JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR TOWN-563101.

¶15

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT, TECHNICAL EDUCATION BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT, KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR -563101.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. C. JAGADISH, SPECIAL COUNSEL)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED MEETING PROCEEDING/ORDER OF CASTE VERIFICATION PROCEEDINGS DATED 26.11.2021 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 COMMITTEE AS PER ANNEXURE-A SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AS ILLEGAL AND ERROR OF JURISDICTION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The petitioner has challenged an order of the District Caste Verification Committee dated 26.11.2021 on the ground that it lacks jurisdiction to pass the same.

¶27

(i) The petitioner claims that he belonged to Jaggali caste, which is a notified Scheduled Caste for the purposes of reservation and concession in the State of Karnataka. A caste certificate to that effect was issued by the Tahsildar, Srinivasapura Taluk on 09.02.2007 and also on 09.02.2009. The petitioner claims that while he was studying

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

M.Sc. in Agricultural Economics, he had applied for scholarship during the year 2008-09 under Scheduled Caste reserved category. After completion of his Masters degree, he applied for the post of Agriculture Officer in the Department of Agriculture, State of Karnataka, in the Scheduled Caste category and he was selected to the said post. On 26.04.2012, the Commissioner in the Department of Agriculture had referred the case of the petitioner to the District Caste Verification Committee, Kolar, for verification and issuance of validity certificate. The Caste Verification Committee, Kolar, conducted an enquiry and issued a validity certificate on 07.06.2012. Thereafter, on 28.08.2012, an anonymous complaint was lodged with the District Social Welfare Officer, who forwarded the same to the Commissioner in Department of Agriculture to stall the validity certificate issued to the petitioner until further orders. The District Caste Verification Committee again conducted an enquiry to verify the documents of the petitioner relating to his social status. After due satisfaction, the District Social Welfare Officer in terms of his letter dated 26.09.2012 informed the Commissioner in Department of Agriculture that the letter dated 28.08.2012 was

¶31

4 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

closed and validity certificate issued to the petitioner on 07.06.2012 was lawful and valid. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued with an appointment order and he joined duty as Agriculture Officer on 31.10.2012 and posted at the office of the Assistant Director, Department of Agriculture, Bangarapet.

¶35

(ii) When things stood thus, the respondent No.4 issued a notice under Section 91 of Cr.P.C calling upon the petitioner to appear for an enquiry along with all documents relating to his caste. The petitioner claimed that the said notice was issued at the behest of the respondent No.2 that too after issuance of validity certificate by the District Caste Verification Committee under Section 4C of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment etc.,) Act, 1990. Nonetheless, the petitioner appeared before the respondent No.2 and submitted all the documents relating to his caste. Despite the above, the respondent No.2 continued to harass the petitioner seeking various information from him. The petitioner therefore, approached this Court in W.P.No.6076/2018 and this Court granted an interim order of stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 23.11.2017. Thereafter, this

¶36

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Court in terms of the order dated 07.03.2019, quashed the verification proceedings initiated by the respondent No.3. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 overreached the order of this Court and submitted a partisan report before the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to initiate proceedings against the petitioner and caused a notice dated 12.08.2021. The petitioner again submitted reply to the notice along with all documents to justify his status as a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste. Nonetheless, the respondent No.1 is proceeding with the enquiry against the petitioner. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court challenging the authority of the respondents to re-look into his caste after a validity certificate was duly issued.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the validity certificate was issued, any person aggrieved by such issuance was entitled to question before the appropriate Appellate Authority and no one could have gone before the respondents to re-look the caste certificate issued to the petitioner. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in V.S. Bali vs.

¶40

State Bank of Hyderabad and another [W.A.No.604/2007].

¶41

6 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:36673 WP No. 22459 of 2021

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

The learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute that once the validity certificate is issued, the respondents have no authority in law to re-look into the case. He also concedes that the issue is squarely covered on all fours

¶45

by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.604/2007, referred supra.

¶46

In that view of the matter, this petition deserves to

¶47

be allowed and the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 dated 26.11.2021 deserves to be quashed.

¶48

Accordingly, the following order is passed:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(i) This writ petition is allowed .

¶51

(ii) The impugned order dated 26.11.2021 passed by respondent No.1 in so far as petitioner is concerned, is quashed.

¶52

(iii) However, if any authority has any power under any law to re-visit the case of the petitioner, they may do so in accordance with Section 4D of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled

¶53