IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that the cancellation of the caste certificate was unjustified, reinstating the petitioner's service based on her established caste identity and residency prior to state reorganization.

ORDER :

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J.)

1. By filing WPC No.1944/2019, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.02.2019 passed by High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee, whereby the said Committee has cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner, whereas by filing WPS No.4973/2019, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.05.2019 passed by Divisional Joint Director Agriculture, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (CG), whereby services of the petitioner has been terminated on the basis of order dated 23.02.2019 passed by High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee. Hence, it is very much relevant to hear both the cases analogously, therefore, both the cases are heard and decided by a common order.

2. The petitioner has preferred WPC No. 1944/2019 under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief:-

“10.i That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 23.02.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No. 2.

10.ii That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the show cause notice dated 07.05.2019.

10.iii Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner.

10.iv. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also, kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

The petitioner has preferred WPS No. 4973/2019 under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief:-

“10.i That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned termination of service of petitioner order dated 27.05.2019 (Annexure-P/1) passed by respondent No.3.

10.ii That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner.

10.iii Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner.

10.iv Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also, kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

3. Facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Gramin Vikas Vistar Adhikari, Mungeli on 07.5.1999 against a post reserved for candidate of Scheduled Caste, on the basis of her Caste Certificate issued on 28.02.1992 by Tahsildar, Bilaspur, Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh). On a complaint received, in respect of her caste, respondent No. 2, High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee initiated proceeding to verify the case certificate of the petitioner. During the course of enquiry, the petitioner produced caste certificate of her father and other relevant documents. However, the High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee has held that the petitioner has failed to produce documents/evidence prior to Presidential notification dated 10.8.1950 in respect of her/her family’s social status/caste as ‘Kori’ scheduled caste in the State of Madhya Pradesh and further held that the Tahsildar, Bilaspur, who issued the caste certificate on 28.02.1992, is not a competent authority to issue the caste certificate, thereby cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner issued by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur (the then Madhya Pradesh) on 28-2-1992. Against the order of cancellation of the caste certificate, the petitioner has filed WPC No.1944/2019, wherein vide Order dated 18.6.2019, this Court has granted interim protection in respect of service of the petitioner. However vide order dated 27.5.2019 respondent No.3/Divisional Joint Director Agriculture, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (CG) has terminated her services, against which the petitioner preferred instant petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner joined on the post of Gramin Krishi Vistar Adhikari on 07.5.1999 in the erstwhile/undivided State of Madhya Pradesh under the category of Scheduled Castes as she belongs to ‘Kori’ community. On account of the Madhya Pradesh State Regorganization Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2000’), the services of the petitioner got allocated to the newly created State of Chhattis