Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART 2025:CGHC:485 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3467 of 2016 1 - Ku. Leena Ukey D/o. Shri Sudhakar Ukey, Aged About 38 Years Working as a Shikshakarmi Grade- I, Higher Secondary School Gurra Bhatapara At Zila Panchayat, Raipur Chhattisgarh, R/o Quarter No. 281, Janta Colony Tilak Nagar, Gudhiyari, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Asha Ukey (now after marriage Asha Ramteke), W/o. Shri Anil Ramteke, Aged About 34 Years Working as an Assistant Professor At Govt. Mata Karma Girls College, Mahasamund Chhattisgarh, R/o Quarter No. 281, Janta Colony Tilak Nagar, Gudhiyari, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Prashant Ukey, S/o. Shri Sudhakar Ukey, Aged About 37 Years R/o Quarter No. 281, Janta Colony Tilak Nagar, Gudhiyari, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh versus --- Petitioner(s) 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee (Caste Certificate), Through Its Chairman, High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, Scheduled Caste Research And Training Institute, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Campus, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Principal, Government Mata Karma Girls College, 4 - Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) --- Respondent(s) 2 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) For Petitioner For State :- Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate :- Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 03.01.2025 1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner herein calls in question legality, validity and correctness of order dated 27.06.2016 (Annexure P/1) passed by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee/respondent No.2 constituted under Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the Act of 2013’) read with Rule 19 of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Rules, 2013 (for short, ‘the Rules of 2013’), by which the petitioners’ caste certificates dated 08.08.2005 have been invalidated. 2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop: - It is the case of the petitioners that since the year 1928-29 their family have been residing in District Raipur which comes under the jurisdiction of the State of Chhattisgarh 3 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) and they belong to caste ‘Mahar’, which comes under the Scheduled Caste category and their caste certificates were issued to them by the competent authority/Sub-Divisional Officer on 08.08.2005. On the basis of the said caste certificate issued by the competent authority, the father of petitioners, on their behalf, had applied for verification of their caste by submitting required documents, but due to inaction on the part of the authorities, their caste
Facts
certificates could not get verified. Being aggrieved by the same, the father of petitioners approached this Court by filing writ petition bearing WPC No.4733/2010 and this Court vide order dated 30.08.2010 (Annexure P/11), directed the Caste Scrutiny Committee to proceed in
Legal Reasoning
accordance with the decision rendered by this Court in the matter of Dinesh Kumar Bhagoria v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others (WPS No.3338/2007 decided on 19.08.2010). In compliance with the same, the case of the petitioners for verification of their caste certificates was handed over by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee to the Vigilance Cell of the said Committee, which submitted its report on 29.01.2013 and the petitioners were served with show- cause notice on 07.02.2013. The petitioners also appeared before the Committee on 27.06.2016 and ultimately, impugned order dated 27.06.2016 was passed relating to 4 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) invalidation of their caste certificates, owing to which, the petitioners may be deprived from employment as the verified caste certificate is a mandatory requirement for government employment. The further case of the petitioner is that in accordance with Section 7 of the Act of 2013 read with Rule 19 of the Rules of 2013, a five multi- member committee has to be constituted, yet, the Committee which has taken the impugned decision was not duly constituted as the Chairman of the Committee who is also the Director, Adimjati Administration & Training Institute, Raipur, has also participated in the capacity of Vice-Chairman, whereas he cannot be permitted to participate in the said capacity and therefore the Committee was not duly constituted and as such the impugned order is liable to be rejected. 3. Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that notification dated 22-8-2013 has been issued in accordance with Section 7 of the Act of 2013 read with Rule 19 of the Rules of 2013 and there has to be a five multi-member committee under the statutory notification which cannot delegate the statutory power to the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Committee and the Chairman of the Committee cannot participate in the dual capacity of both Chairman & Vice-Chairman, as the very 5 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) object of the multi-member committee constituted by the said notification would frustrate and it leads to non- compliance of the notification. He would further submit that non-compliance of the notification dated 22-8-2013 suffers from vice of discrimination and as a consequence of the order passed by the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 7 of the Act of 2013, the social status certificates of the petitioners have been declared invalid which would have drastic civil consequences and the order passed by the said Committee is only subject to proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, therefore, constitution of the committee must be in accordance with notification dated 22-8-2013, therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside. 4. Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents, would submit that the Committee so constituted has considered the case of the petitioners in accordance with law and merely because the Chairman of the Committee has also participated in the dual capacity of Chairman & Vice-Chairman as well, the same would not cause any prejudice to the petitioners more particularly, the petitioners have participated in the entire proceeding and did not raise any objection in that 6 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) regard right in time and therefore the writ petition deserves to be dismissed and the order impugned deserves to be upheld. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the material available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the matter of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others1, in order to streamline the procedure for issuance of social status certificate, has directed all the State Governments to constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (II) 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. 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. 1 (1994) 6 SCC 241 7 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) 7. Thereafter, the Act of 2013 was enacted to protect the interest of persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and Other Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of citizens in the State from those who fraudulently obtains false Social Status Certification, certifying that the person belongs to these sections of populations, which came into force with effect from 29-4- 2013. Section 7 of the Act of 2013 provides for constitution of High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, which states that the State Government shall constitute, by notification in the Official Gazette, one or more High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee or Committees, for conducting enquiry into Social Status Certificate(s) referred to it by District Level Certificates Verification Committee under Section 6 or by the State Government, and it shall be the duty of the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee to examine the report of the District Level Certificates Verification Committee and to proceed in the matter as prescribed under Chapter IV of the Act, and it shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. However, Section 8 of the Act of 2013 provides for cancellation and confiscation of false Social Status Certificate, which states that if after enquiry under Section 7 of the Act, High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee 8 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) is of the opinion that, the social status certificate was obtained wrongfully or fraudulently, it shall, by an order in writing, cancel and confiscate the certificate by following such procedure as may be prescribed. As such, cancellation or confiscation of a Social Status Certificate has drastic civil consequences upon the status of the person whose caste certificate is in question. 8. In exercise of the power under Section 7(1) of the Act of 2013, the State Government has constituted the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, as under, by Notification dated 22.8.2013 :- dz- 1- Lkfefr esa ukekafdr vf/kdkjhx.k izeq[k lfpo@lfpo] NRrhlx<+ ’kklu] vkfne tkfr rFkk vuqlwfpr tkfr fodkl foHkkx 2- vk;qDr@lapkyd] vkfne tkfr vuqla/kku rFkk izf’k{k.k laLFkku] N-x-] jk;iqj 3- vk;qDr@lapkyd] vkfne tkfr rFkk vuqlwfpr tkfr fodkl foHkkx] N-x-] jk;iqj 4- vk;qDr@lapkyd] vkfne tkfr vuqla/kku rFkk izf’k{k.k laLFkku] jk;iqj }kjk vkfne tkfr vuqla/kku rFkk izf’k{k.k laLFkku esa inLFk la;qDr lapkyd@mi lapkyd@mi lapkyd@lgk;d lapkyd@ vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh@lgk;d vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh esa ls] ukekafdr nks vf/kdkjh v/;{k@lnL; v/;{k mik/;{k LknL; lfpo LknL; 9. As such, by virtue of notification dated 22-8-2013, if a Social Status Certificate is questioned, it has to be considered by the committee so constituted that is a five 9 (WPS No. 3467 of 2016) multi-member committee consisting of (1) Principal Secretary/Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Tribal & Scheduled Castes Development being Chairman; (2) Commissioner/Director, Tribal Research & Training Institute, Chhattisgarh, Raipur being Vice-Chairman; (3) Commissioner/ Director, Tribal & Scheduled Castes Development, Chhattisgarh, Raipur being Member Secretary; and (4) two Officers amongst Joint Director/Deputy Director/Assistant Director/Research Officer/ Assistant Research Officer posted in Tribal Research & Training Institute, Raipur, nominated by Commissioner/Director, Tribal Research & Training Institute, Raipur, being Members. 10. It is well settled law that if a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner. (See Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad and others2.) 11. In the matter of Tata Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Jamnagar3 it has been held that if the law requires that something to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner, and if not done in that manner has no existence