JUDGMENT

ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, J.:–

In the instant application though the petitioner had initially made several prayers, he has confined his prayer for setting aside the order dated 16.10.2021 passed by the Circle Officer, Dighwara, Saran vide order no.580 dated 16.10.2021 whereby the caste certificate issued to the petitioner declaring him to be member of ‘Dangi’ caste was cancelled.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner belongs to ‘Dangi’ caste. In this respect, a certificate was granted to him under the signature of the Revenue Officer (respondent no.7) on 05.04.2016. He submitted that the caste ‘Dangi’ has been placed in schedule I at serial no.127 of the extremely backward caste vide Notification No.10398 dated 30.07.2015 of the Government of Bihar. On 24th August, 2021, the State Election Commission notified the Panchayat Elections in the State of Bihar to be held in eleven phases. The election of the block to which the petitioner belonged was scheduled to be held on 03.11.2021 in the 6th phase of the Panchayat Election, 2021. After filing the nomination, the impugned order dated 16.10.2021 was passed by the Circle Officer, Dighwara, Saran cancelling the caste certificate granted in favour of the petitioner earlier. The Circle Officer recorded in the impugned order that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Dangi’ caste.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and Anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others since reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241 issued direction whereby all the State Governments were directed 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 case of any complaint in respect of caste certificate, the verification was required to be done by the said scrutiny committee. He contended that in the instant case, the caste certificate has been cancelled by the Circle Officer in complete violation of the direction given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra). He contended that the impugned order passed by the Circle Officer is wholly without jurisdiction.

4. The State has filed its counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that after submission of the nomination paper by the petitioner, his attached caste certificate of ‘Dangi’ caste was sent to the Circle Officer, Dighwara, Saran by the Block Development Officer, Dighwara vide letter dated 16.10.2021 for verification and opinion. Thereafter, the Circle Officer, Dighwara, Saran duly enquired into the matter and called for a detailed report from Halka Karamchari, who after going through all the relevant papers, reported that in Khatiyan land appertaining to Thana No.3, Khata No. 702 situated in village-Unhan Chak under Dighwara Block, Saran is recorded in the name of Sakaldeep Singh S/o Ram Sewak Singh, caste-’Koyeri’. The said Sakaldeep Singh is father of the petitioner Sunil Kumar Singh @ Sunil Singh, who belonged to the ‘Koyeri’ caste.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that considering the report of the Halka Karamchari and after going through the revenue records, the Circle Officer, Dighwara came to the conclusion that the caste of the petitioner is ‘Koyeri’ and not ‘Dangi’. He contended that under the aforesaid circumstance, the Circle Officer rightly cancelled the caste certificate granted in favour of the petitioner earlier.

6. When confronted without the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra), he fairly conceded that the Circle Officer ought not to have passed the impugned order.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties an