Hon’ble Krishna Murari, J.—Heard Shri L.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner was issued a caste certificate of ‘Gond’ by respondent No. 3, Tehsildar, Sadar, Ghazipur duly countersigned by respondent No. 2, District Magistrate, Ghazipur on 18.10.2003. The said ‘Gond’ caste has been declared as Scheduled Tribes by the State of U.P. by Government Order dated 3.7.2003 amending the list of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes contained in Government Order dated 10.7.1986 in compliance of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 2002.

3. On the strength of the caste certificate issued to the petitioner, he was appointed as Chowkidar on 12.7.2006 and posted in the office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, XVII, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Respondent No. 4, Income Tax Officer, Head Quarters, Personnel, Office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax sent the caste certificate of the petitioner for verification to respondent No. 3, Tehsildar, Sadar, Ghazipur. Respondent No. 3 is alleged to have conducted some ex parte inquiry behind the back of the petitioner without any notice or knowledge to him, on the basis of whereof, he informed respondent No. 4 that petitioner has been found to be a member of ‘Bhadbhujiya’ caste, which is a backward caste and the caste certificate issued to him has been cancelled. On receipt of the said information from respondent No. 3, respondent No. 4 issued a show-cause notice dated 25.6.2008 and served upon the petitioner a copy of the order dated 14.3.2008 cancelling the caste certificate issued to the petitioner.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner sought information under Right to Information Act and approached this Court by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35298 of 2008, Rajesh Kumar Gond v. State of U.P. and others, which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 25.7.2008 giving liberty to the petitioner to file representation before respondent No. 3 with the direction to him to decide the same, if possible within three months and till disposal of the representation, the order dated 14.3.2008 passed by respondent No. 3 was kept in abeyance. In compliance of the said order, petitioner submitted a representation dated 21.8.2008. vide order dated 5.11.2008, respondent No. 3 rejected the representation of the petitioner without any opportunity of hearing to him.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Tehsildar has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. He further submits that it is only a Caste Scrutiny Committee constituted by the State Government, which could have verified the caste certificate issued to the petitioner.

6. The Hon’ble Apex Court while considering the issue of caste certificate and its verification, has issued general directions in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, 1994 (6) SCC 241. The Apex Court in the said judgment has issued general directions for issuance of caste certificate, its scrutiny and approval. The State Government taking into consideration the general direction issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil’s case (supra), has issued a detail Government Order dated 5th January, 1991 providing for jurisdiction for issuance of caste certificate and procedure for verification of caste. By the said Government Order, a Scrutiny Committee headed by Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department was constituted to verify the caste certificate.

7. A Division Bench of this Court, while considering a challenge to an order of District Magistrate rejecting the claim of issuance of caste certificate, issued certain directions in Writ Petition No. 1611 (MB) of 2008 Taramuni Tharu v. State of U.P. and others. Following observations were made by the Division Bench of this Court :

“Considering the submissions made during the course of arguments and looking to the fact that this Court is floode