Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, J.
Shrawan Kumar Nandanwar, S/o Late Urkurya Nandanwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Development Department - Respondent
WPS No. 4649 of 2010
Decided on : 21-12-2023
Caste Certificate - Scheduled Tribe - [Constitution of India, Article 15; Constitution of India, Article 16; Constitution of India, Article 335; Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 3(1)(x); The Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and Other Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificates Act, 2003, Section 3] - The court discussed the legal provisions related to the issuance and verification of caste certificates, including the burden of proof on the person claiming the benefit, and the guidelines for verifying caste certificates. The court also referred to previous judgments and their interpretations, emphasizing the need for bona fide certification and the protection of individuals who obtained jobs prior to a certain date.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to the Halba Tribe, challenged the termination of his services based on the allegation of producing a false caste certificate. The petitioner claimed to belong to the Halba Tribe and provided various documents in support of his claim. The respondent authorities conducted an inquiry and ultimately recommended the petitioner's termination.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner obtained a caste certificate prior to the year 2000 and joined service before that date. The court held that the petitioner's certificate appeared to be bona fide and that he was entitled to protection as per previous court orders. The court ruled that the impugned order would not affect the petitioner's retiral benefits, but he or his legal heirs would not be entitled to claim any benefits of being a Scheduled Tribe.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the petitioner's caste certificate, the conduct of the inquiry by the respondent authorities, and the application of previous court orders to the petitioner's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the petitioner's obtaining of the caste certificate prior to 2000, his joining of service before that date, and the protection granted to individuals in similar circumstances as per previous court orders.
Final Decision: The impugned order would not affect the petitioner's retiral benefits, but he or his legal heirs would not be entitled to claim any benefits of being a Scheduled Tribe.
ORDER :
1. The challenge in the instant petition is to the order dated 02.08.2010 passed by respondent No.3 whereby it is directed by the Caste Certificate High Level Scrutiny Committee to terminate the services of the petitioner. The challenge is also against the illegal and arbitrary proceedings carried out by respondent No.3 whereby the petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing and also to present his case on account of not supplying the documents relating to investigation done against him.
2. Brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner genuinely belongs to "Halba" Tribe which is a Scheduled Tribe. It is pertinent to mention here that "Halba"/"Halbi" is a Scheduled Tribe of the State of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh. The Halba Tribe, which is an origin of Nagpur plain, is found in the central India, in the States of Maharashtra (Southern), Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and some parts of Orissa. The petitioner obtained his primary education from Government Medium School, Mehandivada, Balaghat and the progress card of class 5th and 7th issued by the Principal of Government Medium School, Mehandivada, District Balaghat showed that the petitioner belongs to "Halba" Tribe which is a Scheduled Tribe. A copy of the Mark Sheet is being filed as Annexure P/2 & P/3. The Tahsildar of Tahsil Chhuikhadan issued the caste certificate in favour of present petitioner on 12.12.1983 and the copy of Caste Certificate is being filed as Annexure P/4.
3. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Sericulture Inspector at Ambikapur and joined on 11.09.1989 on permanent basis. In the year 1998, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Sericulture Inspector and posted at District Mandala. Upon constitution of the State of Chhattisgarh, the petitioner was allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh in the year 2002 and posted in Koriya, Ambikapur and thereafter posted in District Kanker. On 03.11.1999, a notice was issued by Assistant Director, Sericulture Department to the petitioner regarding the verification of Caste Certificate which was submitted at the time of appointment. In response to that notice, on 26.11.1999, the petitioner submitted the detailed reply to the notice dated 03.11.1999. Copies of notice dated 03.11.1999 and reply dated 26.11.1999 are filed as Annexure P/5 & P/6 respectively.
4. Again on 22.03.2001, the office of District Chief, District Mandala issued notice regarding clarification of the caste as well as domicile certificate. In response to the notice dated 22.03.2001, the petitioner made detailed clarification letter to said authority regarding the residence as well as the caste of the petitioner. Copies of the notice dated 22.03.2001 and clarification letter are filed as Annexure P/7 & P/8 respectively. On 17.09.2004, the notice was issued by Directorate of Rural Industry, Chhattisgarh, Sericulture Sector asking the petitioner to submit all the relevant documents within 7 days in this office for valid caste certificate. A copy of notice dated 17.09.2004 is annexed as Annexure P/9. Reply to that, the present petitioner again submitted the reply and asked for some time to submit the relevant documents before the authority. A copy of letter dated 25.10.2004 is filed herewith as Annexure P/10. Thereafter, on 25.05.2005, the petitioner gave all the detail of his land and submitted all the documents belonging to his land before the said authority. A copy of all the relevant documents is filed herewith as Annexure P/11. On 12.08.2005, the respondent authority asked the petitioner to remain present before Chhattisgarh State Scheduled Tribe Commission Raipur on 27.08 2005 to put forth his defence along with necessary documents with regard to his caste. A copy of notice dated 12.08.2005 is filed as Annexure P/12. In response to that, the petitioner was present before the authority with all the necessary documents with regard to his caste and submitted to the said
The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of the petitioner's service despite the cancellation of her caste certificate, along with the limitation on claiming benefits as a S....
The burden of proof lies with the claimant to establish caste status, which was not met, leading to the rejection of the claim.
Caste claims must be evaluated with pre-constitutional documents holding greater evidential value, and reliance on affinity tests, which do not definitively establish caste ties, is insufficient for ....
A fraudulent document is non est from the beginning and cannot be countenanced in law. A party to a litigation cannot approbate and reprobate from his stand taken before a quasi-judicial authority to....
The court established that claims to belong to reserved categories must be substantiated with credible evidence, and fraudulent claims undermine the constitutional provisions for social justice, lead....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
