Prabhakar Kharsel Vs State Level Scrutiny Committee

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) NO. 18065 OF 2015

¶3

In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶4

Prabhakar Kharsel …. Petitioner

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

State Level Scrutiny Committee …. Opp. Parties represented through R.D.C., Northern Division-cum-Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee, Northern Division, Odisha, Sambalur & others

¶7

Advocates appeared in this case:

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s Himansu Sekhar Mishra, A.K. Mishra, A.K. Tripathy & K. Badhee, Advocates

¶9

For Opp. Parties : Mr. U.C. Behura, Addl. Government Advocate

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

¶12

¶13

Date of hearing & judgment : 08.12.2025

¶14

¶15

Page 1 of 14

¶16

PER DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD,J .

¶17

Petitioner is essentially aggrieved by order dated 01.11.2014,

¶18

whereby the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) found his claim, for Social Status as a Scheduled Tribe, to be fraudulent. As a consequence, the Committee issued a slew of directions inter alia

¶19

for cancellation of Scheduled Tribe Certificate vide Miscellaneous No.485 of 1989 and for launching criminal proceedings, apart from instructing the Collector to dismiss him from service.

¶20

2. Learned Advocate Mr. H.S. Mishra appearing for the Petitioner vehemently argues that:

¶21

(a) The Committee has misdirected itself in concluding the inquiry proceedings contrary to the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner , AIR 1995 SC 94.

¶22

(b) After the whole lot of exercise enumerated in Paragraph 13 of Madhuri Patil supra is undertaken, all copies of reports &

¶23

Page 2 of 14

¶24

findings should be given to the candidate to have his say in the matter, and this procedure has not been followed sans any justification.

¶25

(c) No reasonable opportunity of hearing was given to the Petitioner and thus the impugned order is vulnerable for challenge on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶26

(d) Once the impugned order is set at naught, Petitioner is liable to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits, inasmuch as, he lost his job on account of the impugned order, was made to go to jail, all without any justification whatsoever.

¶27

3. Learned AGA Mr. Behura appearing for the official OPs vehemently resists the petition refuting the contentions of Petitioner and making submission in justification of the impugned order. He points out that the impugned order is well reasoned,

¶28

and that it has been issued as an institutional decision unanimously arrived at by all the constituent members of the committee. He also tells the Court that these members of the

¶29

Page 3 of 14

¶30

committee are high functionaries of the Government with accumulated expertise and therefore, Court should loathe to interfere. Lastly, he contends that merely because SLSC order is to be set aside, that ipso facto cannot result into automatic reinstatement of dismissed employee, a host of factors enter in the fray. So submitting, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.

¶31

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter as under and for the following reasons:

¶32

4 .1. Social Status, be it of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or

¶33

other backward classes, has been developed as a special branch of jurisprudence. It assumes importance in the matter of public employment, admission to public educational institutions, gaining

¶34

entry to professional courses, electoral constituencies, etc. Several

¶35

States in the country had lacked statutory framework for dealing

¶36

Page 4 of 14

¶37

with the claim for Social Status and the apex Court in Madhuri Patil supra laid down the broad parameters & guidelines. Thereafter, States have enacted statutes and promulgated binding rules. The State Legislature has enacted Odisha Act 8 of 2014, i.e., the Odisha Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and backward Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Act, 2012. The State Government has promulgated the Odisha Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and backward Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Rules, 2023.

¶38

4 .2. The first contention of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the guidelines laid down in Madhuri Patil supra have not been followed in pith & substance by the committee while holding the

¶39

inquiry, has some force. At Para 13 the following guidelines have been laid down:

¶40

Page 5 of 14

¶41

“13. The admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained on the basis of false social status certificate necessarily has the effect of depriving the genuine Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or OBC candidates as enjoined in the Constitution of the benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. The genuine candidates are also denied admission to educational institutions or appointments to office or posts under a State for want of social status certificate. The ineligible or spurious persons who falsely gained entry resort to dilatory tactics and create hurdles in completion of the inquiries by the Scrutiny Committee. It is true that the applications for admission to educational institutions are generally made by a parent, since on that date many a time the student may be a minor. It is the parent or the guardian who may play fraud claiming false status certificate. It is, therefore, necessary that the certificates issued are scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost expedition and promptitude. For that purpose, it is necessary to streamline the procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval, which may be the following:

¶42

1. The application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather than at the Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.

¶43

2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal communities, the place from which he originally hails from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the Directorate concerned.

¶44

3. Application for verification of the caste certificate by the Scrutiny Committee shall be filed at least six months in advance before seeking admission into educational institution or an appointment to a post.

¶45

4. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (1) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer

¶46

Page 6 of 14

¶47

higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (11) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and (III) in the case of Scheduled Castes another officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificates.

¶48

In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.

¶49

5. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims. The Inspector would go to the local place of residence and original place from which the candidate hails and usually resides or in case of migration to the town or city, the place from which he originally hailed from. The vigilance officer should personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He should also examine the school records, birth registration, if any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have knowledge of the social status of the candidate and then submit a report to the Directorate together with all particulars as envisaged in the pro forma, in particular, of the Scheduled Tribes relating to their peculiar anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies etc. by the castes or tribes or tribal communities concerned etc.

¶50

6. The Director concerned, on receipt of the report from the vigilance officer if he found the claim for social status to be "not genuine" or 'doubtful' or spurious or falsely or wrongly claimed, the Director concerned should issue show-cause notice supplying a copy of the report of the vigilance officer to the candidate by a registered post with acknowledgement due or through the head of the educational institution concerned in which the candidate is studying or employed. The notice should indicate that the representation or reply, if any, would be made

¶51

Page 7 of 14

¶52

within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the notice and in no case on request not more than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice.

¶53

In case, the candidate seeks for an opportunity of hearing and claims an inquiry to be made in that behalf, the Director on receipt of such representation/reply shall convene the committee and the Joint/Additional Secretary as Chairperson who shall give reasonable opportunity to the candidate/parent/guardian to adduce all evidence in support of their claim. A public notice by beat of drum or any other convenient mode may be published in the village or locality and if any person or association opposes such a claim, an opportunity to adduce evidence may be given to him/it. After giving such opportunity either in person or through counsel, the Committee may make such inquiry as it deems expedient and consider the claims vis-a-vis the objections raised by the candidate or opponent and pass an appropriate order with brief reasons in support thereof.

¶54

7. In case the report is in favour of the candidate and found to be genuine and true, no further action need be taken except where the report or the particulars given are procured or found to be false or fraudulently obtained and in the latter event the same procedure as is envisaged in para 6 be followed.

¶55

8. Notice contemplated in para 6 should be issued to the parents/guardian also in case candidate is minor to appear before the Committee with all evidence in his or their support of the claim for the social status certificates.

¶56

9. The inquiry should be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably by day-to-day proceedings within such period not exceeding two months. If after inquiry, the Caste Scrutiny Committee finds the claim to be false or spurious, they should pass an order cancelling the certificate issued and confiscate the same. It should communicate within one month from the date of the conclusion of the proceedings the result of enquiry to the parent/guardian and the applicant.

¶57

Page 8 of 14

¶58

10. In case of any delay in finalising the proceedings, and in the meanwhile the last date for admission into an educational institution or appointment to an officer post, is getting expired, the candidate be admitted by the Principal or such other authority competent in that behalf or appointed on the basis of the social status certificate already issued or an affidavit duly sworn by the parent/guardian/candidate before the competent officer or non-official and such admission or appointment should be only provisional, subject to the result of the inquiry by the Scrutiny Committee.

¶59

11. The order passed by the Committee shall be final and conclusive only subject to the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.

¶60

12. No suit or other proceedings before any other authority should lie.

¶61

13. The High Court would dispose of these cases as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months. In case, as per its procedure, the writ petition/miscellaneous petition/matter is disposed of by a Single Judge, then no further appeal would lie against that order to the Division Bench but subject to special leave under Article 136.

¶62

14. In case, the certificate obtained or social status claimed is found to be false, the parent/guardian/the candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim. If the prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence of the accused, it could be regarded as an offence involving moral turpitude, disqualification for elective posts or offices under the State or the Union or elections to any local body, legislature or Parliament.

¶63

15. As soon as the finding is recorded by the Scrutiny Committee holding that the certificate obtained was false, on its cancellation and confiscation simultaneously, it should be communicated to the educational institution concerned or the appointing authority by registered post with acknowledgement due with a request to cancel the admission or the appointment. The Principal etc. of the educational institution responsible for making the admission or the appointing authority, should cancel the admission/appointment without any

¶64

Page 9 of 14

¶65

further notice to the candidate and debar the candidate from further study or continue in office in a post.”

¶66

The above guidelines ought to have been scrupulously followed, inasmuch as the 2012 Act in question and the 2023 Rules promulgated thereunder not being retrospective. However, the wisdom from the provisions of the Act is always available, whoever wants to seek it.

¶67

4.3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner is right in arguing that

¶68

once the proceedings at the level of Officials of Revenue or Social Welfare Department is held in terms of Madhuri Patil guidelines,

¶69

copies thereof have to be supplied to the candidates to have their say in the matter. Apparently, these copies were selectively furnished to the Petitioner and therefore, he was in a disadvantageous position to take up effective stand in his favour. Mere exchange of notices would not constitute compliance with

¶70

the requirement of principles of natural justice nor supply of

¶71

Page 10 of 14

¶72

selective documents. Effective participation is essential and therefore, all copies of relevant documents have to be furnished, subject to all just exceptions. After all, principles of natural justice are not a matter of ritual compliances.

¶73

4.4. Learned AGA Mr. Behura and also Mr. Jee are right in telling

¶74

the Court that the 2012 Act in general and 2023 Rules in particular are prospective in operation, although they have been structured in the backdrop of what has been said in Madhuri Patil supra and therefore, even if the matter is remanded, the parameters to be applied are what have been prescribed in Madhuri Patil . The policy content, as expressed by the terminology, and the intent of this piece of legislation and of delegated legislation do indicate their prospective operation. However, as already mentioned, nothing prevents drawal of milk from the same, if need be.

¶75

Page 11 of 14

¶76

4.5. The contention of Mr. Behura that the Writ Court should not

¶77

undertake deeper examination of the matter, when high functionaries of the Government have looked into the same, has to be treated with a pinch of salt. Merely because functionaries of law happen to be high authorities, it is seldom a guarantee that the pith & substance of law will be followed. More often than not, it is not followed. Howsoever high one may be, law is above him. That apart, justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to have been done, said Lord Hewart, the then Lord Chief Justice of England in

¶78

Rex v. Sussex Justices, [1924] 1 KB 256.

¶79

4.6. The last submission of Mr. Mishra that once the impugned order is set at naught, reinstatement in service should happen as a logical consequence, is difficult to agree with. Our Constitution provides for affirmative action by the State for the upliftment of downtrodden communities, who had suffered social

¶80

Page 12 of 14

¶81

disadvantages for centuries. The policy of reservation, which the makers of the Constitution have evolved as a means to achieve socio-economic equality, is an exception to the general rule of equality. At the same time, one cannot lose sight of unscrupulous claim for the grant of social status. A few of such claims are made innocently, is also true. The benefit of reservation should reach only the individuals for whom such a policy is promulgated. When order denying social status is set aside and matter is being remitted for consideration afresh, the claim for reinstatement in service cannot be pressed as a matter of course. The grant of benefit of reservation is confined to the reserved categories and till the status of such a category is duly adjudged on remand, there cannot be reinstatement or such other consequential benefits, as rightly contended by learned AGA Mr. Behura.

¶82

In the above circumstances, this petition is allowed in part. A Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned order dated

¶83

Page 13 of 14

¶84

01.11.2014. Matter is remitted to the State Level Scrutiny Committee for consideration afresh, in the light of observations hereinabove made, within an outer limit of three months. A meaningful opportunity of hearing shall be given to all the stakeholders, including the Petitioner herein. All contentions are kept open.

¶85

It is open to the Committee to solicit any information or document from the side of Petitioner or such other quarters as may be required for due consideration of the remand. However, in that guise delay shall not be brooked.

¶86

Costs made easy.

¶87

Web copy of order shall be acted upon by all concerned.

¶88

( Dixit Krishna Shripad)

¶89

Judge

¶90

Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 8^th day of December, 2025/Basu

¶91

Signature Not Verified

¶92

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ADDL. DY. REGISTRAR-CUM-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 11-Dec-2025 13:55:23

¶93

Page 14 of 14

Prabhakar Kharsel v. State Level Scrutiny Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakar Kharsel v. State Level Scrutiny Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naiyar Khan Vs Collector, Mayurbhanj

Prafulla Kuanr Vs State of Odisha

Bijay Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Sandhyarani Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Shabnam Parveen Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Shakti Shankar Dandapat Vs State of Odisha