JHA v. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital

: Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu ORDER ON BOARD 17/09/2025

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition questioning the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed by High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short “the Committee”) dated 17.06.2015 by which the Caste Certificate of Scheduled Tribe issued in favour of petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that she does not possess any document provided in Chapter II of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Certification of Social Status) Act and Rules, 2013 issued by the Government of Chhattisgarh, showing her caste to be ‘Gond’.

2. Facts relevant for disposal of this writ petition, in brief, are that petitioner claiming herself to be the member of ‘Gond’ community, which comes within the category of Scheduled Tribe, has applied for issuance of a Caste Certificate and the same was issued in her favour by the Circle Organizer, Tribal Welfare Department, Jabalpur on 03.10.1987. Vide order dated 09.09.1993, petitioner was appointed on the post of Women and Child Development Officer, thereafter she was further promoted to the post of Deputy Director vide order dated 25.04.1998. She is now holding substantive post of Joint Director, Women and Child Development Department, Chhattisgarh Raipur. On 23.05.2009 an anonymous complaint was received by the concerned authorities of the State Government including Tribal Research and Training, Trial Welfare Department with respect to correctness of Caste Certificate of petitioner. On the basis of the said complaint, a notice Annexure P-5 was issued to petitioner on 30.05.2009 by the Member and Assistant Director of High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee to produce Appointment Letter, Caste Certificate and relevant portion of service book record. Petitioner had submitted her reply to the notice along with certain documents ie., order of appointment, Caste Certificate, portion of service book and missal record of the year 1909-10 showing names of her forefathers along with family tree. Upon being dissatisfied with the reply of petitioner, the High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee handed over the matter to the Vigilance Cell along with documents produced by petitioner to inquire into complaint and submitting its report. The Vigilance Cell after inquiry submitted report dated 17.01.2014 holding that the petitioner failed to produce any document/ missal record prior to year 1950 showing the caste of petitioner and her forefathers as ‘Gond’, hence, the caste of petitioner is not clear. On receipt of the report of Vigilance Cell, a show-cause notice Annexure P-10 dated 06.03.2014 was issued to petitioner asking her to produce relevant documents and adducing evidence in support of social status. Petitioner submitted her detailed reply on 05.04.2014 to the show-cause notice along with medical certificate of her father. Thereafter, petitioner was served with 5 notices of hearing dated 14.07.2014, 20.08.2014, 27.11.2014, 17.12.2014 and

11.06.2015. Thereafter, by the order impugned, the Committee cancelled the Caste Certificate of petitioner. Petitioner filed present writ petition assailing cancellation of her Caste Certificate and prayed for following reliefs. “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased order/orders, writ/writs, direction/directions quashing the impugned order dated 17.06.2015 Annexure P-1 passed by High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Tribal Research and Training Institute, Raipur and all the consequential actions may also kindly be quashed. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be order/orders, writ/writs, pleased direction/directions quashing the order dated 17.06.2015 (part of P/14) passed by 1 member of the High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Tribal Research and Training Institute, Raipur and the respondents may kindly be directed not to take any further steps in pursuance of the order dated 17.06.2015. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. This writ petition came up for hearing on 02.03.2016 and an interim order in favour of petitioner was passed staying effect and operation of the impugned order dated 17.06.2015.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a member of the caste ‘Gond’ by birth which is notified as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Madhya Pradesh under Appendix I part IX. Her forefathers had migrated in the year 1907 from village Turmadar, Gram Panchayat Kosam Dongri, Tahsil Kundam, District Jabalpur, M.P. Her husband is also a person belonging to Gond caste. The Competent Authority, Circle Organizer, Tribal Welfare Department, Jabalpur, after due verification held that petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Tribe community i.e. Gond, and issued the Caste Certificate in her favour. On the basis of said certificate, petitioner secured employment as a reserved category candidate on the post of LDT and subsequently she was appointed on the post of Women and Child Development Officer. Upon receipt of complaint regarding caste of petitioner, the High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee conducted an inquiry and initiated the proceedings and forwarded the matter to the Vigilance Cell who in turn submitted its report dated 17.07.2014 to the Committee. However, the Committee, without considering the documents submitted by petitioner showing genuineness of her social status, without assigning any reason and without affording any reasonable opportunity of hearing, passed the order impugned dated 17.06.2015 behind her back, canceling Caste Certificate of petitioner which was communicated to her after lapse of 8 months ie. on 23.02.2016. He contended that the order Annexure P-1 is not sustainable because the entire proceedings has been conducted by the Committee of Four Members, whereas according to the notification/ order issued by the State Government, General Administrative Department, dated 30.03.2013 as per the directives of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241 consists of Five Members (President, Vice-President, Member Secretary and 2 Members nominated by Commissioner/ Director of Tribal Research and Training Centre, Raipur), the entire procedure adopted by the Committee got vitiated. He submitted that the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary and has been passed in utter violation of the principle of natural justice. He submits that proper opportunity was not given to the petitioner to submit her reply, adduce evidence and the case of petitioner was closed for final orders. Thus, the respondents have not followed the procedure as prescribed by the Apex Court in the case of Madhuri Patil’s case (supra).

5. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order passed by the Committee invalidating Caste Certificate of petitioner needs to be set aside on the sole ground of defect in composition of the Committee. Learned counsel further submits that even one of the members of the Committee has not signed the proceedings and made endorsement who is none other than Director of the Tribal Research Institute and Training Centre, Raipur who has earlier written a letter that the Certificate submitted by petitioner is fully valid and no further proceeding is required and accordingly, the proceedings initiated against petitioner was closed.

6. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the submissions of learned counsel for petitioner and submitted that, submission of learned counsel for petitioner that opportunity of hearing was not given to petitioner is not correct. A detailed inquiry was done into the matter, notices have been issued to petitioner to which she had responded and her personal appearance was also sought for. After taking into consideration the entire material placed before it including the report of Vigilance Cell, the Committee found that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Gond’ community and accordingly, cancelled her Caste Certificate. Hence, the entire procedure as laid down in the case of Madhuri Patil (supra) has been followed by the Committee and only after following due procedure provided under Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Certification of Social Status) Act impugned order Annexure P-1 has been passed.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

8. Before entering into merits of case, it would be profitable to see whether composition of the Committee invalidating the Caste Certificate of petitioner was in accordance with the law or not.

9. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madhuri Patil (supra) has streamlined the procedure for issuance of Social Status Certificates, their scrutiny and their approval. In the said judgment, the State Governments have been directed to constitute a committee of three Officers namely (1) Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the concerned Department (2) the Director Social Welfare/ Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare as the case may be, (3) and in case of Scheduled Castes, another Officer, who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the Social Status Certificates, for verification of the Caste Certificate. Relevant portion of Para-13 of the decision in Madhuri Patil’s case (supra) reads as under:- … For that purpose, it is necessary to “13. streamline the procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval, which may be the following:

1. x x x x x 2. x x x x x 3. x x x x x 4. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (1) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, Social the Director, (11) 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.

10. The State Government enacted ‘The Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013, which came into force w.e.f. 23.04.2013.

11. Pursuant thereto, the State Government vide Notification dated 22.08.2013 constituted the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee at the State level for verification of Caste Certificates and notified that the Committee shall consists of following persons:- No. Nominated officers in the Committee Chairperson / Member (1)

4. (2) Principal Secretary / Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Tribal & Scheduled Caste Development Department (3) Chairperson Commissioner / Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute, Chhattisgarh, Raipur Vice Chairperson Commissioner / Director, Tribal and Scheduled Caste Development Department, Chhattisgarh, Raipur. Member Secretary Members nominated by Two officers Commissioner/Director, Joint Director/ Deputy Director/Deputy Director/ Research Director/ Assistant Officer/Assistant Research Officer, posted in Tribal Research and Training Institute, Chhattisgarh, Raipur.

12. The Notification dated 28.08.2013 specifically mandates that verification of social status of a person shall be done through the Committee constituted as prescribed under notification issued by State Government under the Act of 2013 which was in compliance of the directives of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil’s case (supra). The Notification lays down the composition of the Committee shall be “Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Member Secretary and two Members to be nominated by the Commissioner/Director among the Joint Director /Deputy Director/Assistant Director/ Research Officer/ Assistant Research Officer, posted in Tribal Research and Training Institute, Chhattisgarh, Raipur”. According this Notification, “Commissioner/Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute Chhattisgarh, Raipur” will be eligible to be the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee. The officers of the particular departments, as mentioned in the Committee, are ex-officio members of the Committee.

13. From perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that all the members of the Committee were not present as in composition of the Committee only three members have participated in the proceedings, out of which one member ie., Member Secretary has refused to sign as he has not participated in the proceedings. Neither Vice President (Director Tribunal Research Institute) nor Member Secretary (Director/ Commissioner) Tribunal Welfare Department have participated in the proceedings or signed the final order.

14. In the Notification dated 22.08.2013, it is expressly made clear that the Committee shall consists of five members and out of which, the Vice Chairperson of the Committee must be the Commissioner/ Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute Chhattisgarh, Raipur.

15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Madhuri Patil (supra) while laying down the procedure for scrutiny of Caste Certificate etc. has categorically held that verification of the Caste Certificate shall be done by the properly constituted caste scrutiny committee. A 'properly constituted' Committee means that one specified in Notification dated 22.08.2013. When the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically laid down the parameters to be followed while scrutinizing a Caste Certificate and the Committee is also constituted by the State Government in consonance with the directives of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil’s case (supra), any such deviation therefrom would in effect nullify the entire proceedings.

16. To hold the inquiry impartially and fairly, it is necessary that the Committee must be constituted in terms of the Notification dated 22.08.2013, that is to say, Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Member Secretary and two Members of the Committee should be different persons because each of the Committee members has his own role to play drawing from his experience and knowledge and it is the application of mind of all the members, will decide the fate of inquiry. If the composition is not complete as notified, it may result in imbalance in the Committee and may lead to a skewed outcome. It is well settled that when a thing is required to be done in a particular manner then it must be done in that manner only. In the matter of Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor, reported in AIR 1936 PC 253 (2), it was observed that where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden.

17. The composition of Committee for verification of social status certificate of petitioner being not in conformity with the Notification dated 22.08.2013, renders all subsequent steps invalid. It is well said axiom that “when the foundation falls, the edifice which has been developed on the foundation, must go."

18. Being so, for want of requisite quorum constituting a High Level Certification Scrutiny Committee, as prescribed in the Notification dated 22.08.2013 issued in terms of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Kumari Madhuri Patil’s case (supra), the proceeding initiated against the petitioner by the Committee which culminated into passing of impugned order invalidating her Caste Certificate, is not sustainable since it has not been passed by the Committee having required quorum and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

19. In the above circumstance, I am of the considered opinion that there is no need to advert to all other questions, which had been argued by learned counsel for the respective parties, touching the merits and demerits of the matter.

20. In the result, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order is quashed. The matter is remanded back for fresh consideration by the properly constituted High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee in conformity with the Notification dated

22.08.2013 issued pursuant to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Madhuri Patil (supra) and to pass fresh order after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as envisaged under the Act of 2013 and the Rules of 2013.

21. Certified copy as per rules. Judge Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu)