The court emphasized the need for compliance with principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings, particularly regarding social status verification, necessitating full disclosure of inquiry documents to affected parties.

JUDGMENT :

DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, J.

1. Petitioner is essentially aggrieved by order dated 01.11.2014, whereby the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) found his claim, for Social Status as a Scheduled Tribe, to be fraudulent. As a consequence, the Committee issued a slew of directions inter alia for cancellation of Scheduled Tribe Certificate vide Miscellaneous No.485 of 1989 and for launching criminal proceedings, apart from instructing the Collector to dismiss him from service.

2. Learned Advocate Mr. H.S. Mishra appearing for the Petitioner vehemently argues that:

(a) The Committee has misdirected itself in concluding the inquiry proceedings contrary to the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner, AIR 1995 SC 94.

(b) After the whole lot of exercise enumerated in Paragraph 13 of Madhuri Patil supra is undertaken, all copies of reports & findings should be given to the candidate to have his say in the matter, and this procedure has not been followed sans any justification.

(c) No reasonable opportunity of hearing was given to the Petitioner and thus the impugned order is vulnerable for challenge on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.

(d) Once the impugned order is set at naught, Petitioner is liable to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits, inasmuch as, he lost his job on account of the impugned order, was made to go to jail, all without any justification whatsoever.

3. Learned AGA Mr. Behura appearing for the official OPs vehemently resists the petition refuting the contentions of Petitioner and making submission in justification of the impugned order. He points out that the impugned order is well reasoned, and that it has been issued as an institutional decision unanimously arrived at by all the constituent members of the committee. He also tells the Court that these members of the committee are high functionaries of the Government with accumulated expertise and therefore, Court should loathe to interfere. Lastly, he contends that merely because SLSC order is to be set aside, that ipso facto cannot result into automatic reinstatement of dismissed employee, a host of factors enter in the fray. So submitting, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter as under and for the following reasons:

4.1. Social Status, be it of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes, has been developed as a special branch of jurisprudence. It assumes importance in the matter of public employment, admission to public educational institutions, gaining entry to professional courses, electoral constituencies, etc. Several States in the country had lacked statutory framework for dealing with the claim for Social Status and the apex Court in Madhuri Patil supra laid down the broad parameters & guidelines. Thereafter, States have enacted statutes and promulgated binding rules. The State Legislature has enacted Odisha Act 8 of 2014, i.e., the Odisha Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and backward Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Act, 2012. The State Government has promulgated the Odisha Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and backward Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Rules, 2023.

4.2. The first contention of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the guidelines laid down in Madhuri Patil supra have not been followed in pith & substance by the committee while holding the inquiry, has some force. At Para 13 the following guidelines have been laid down:

“13. The admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained on the basi