Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rohit Arya and Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar, JJ.
Jajpal Singh v. Ladduram Kori & Others
Writ Appeals No. 1668 of 2022 and 1675 of 2022 (Gwalior): against the order dated 12.12.2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 4794/2020; Decided on 9.8.2023
(1) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- scope of judicial review -- it is extraordinary constitutional power for purpose of enforcement of legal and fundamental rights of citizens with self-imposed limitations in context of manner of exercise of jurisdiction -- equitable in nature -- liable to be exercised with circumspection on touchstone of justice, equity and good conscience -- sacrosanct and fundamental, to protect democratic polity governed by rule of law. [Para 11
(2) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- duty of Court -- great obligation cast on constitutional Court to defend values of Constitution and rights of people -- Court must act within judicially permissible limitations to uphold rule of law. AIR 2000 SC 3751 followed. [Para 11
(3) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- scope of power -- constitutional Court may examine legality, validity and propriety of administrative action on 5 grounds -- (i) violation of fundamental rights in Part III of Constitution, (ii) want or excess of authority or jurisdiction (coram non judice), (iii) violation of principles of natural justice, (iv) bias and mala fide, and (v) colourable exercise of power. [Para 12
(4) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- jurisdiction -- challenge to report and recommendations of High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee -- Committee considered all material facts and recorded finding -- though another view as Court of appeal may be possible, it is not ground to reverse finding -- Court has to see whether Committee considered all relevant material, or has not applied its mind to relevant facts which led Committee to ultimately record finding -- Committee not adjudicating authority like Court or Tribunal, but administrative body which verifies facts, investigates into specific claims of caste status and ascertains whether caste/tribal status claimed is correct or not -- as such, scope of judicial review over deliberations and decisions of Scrutiny Committee under Art. 226 is limited in nature. (1994) 6 SCC 241 and (2012) 1 SCC 333 followed. [Paras 12 & 13
(5) Caste Certificate -- appellant's grandfather migrated from Punjab to Gwalior State about 90-100 years ago -- none of his family members went to any school and all of them were illiterate -- none have been in public employment -- statement of appellant that there was no need to obtain caste certificate for his forefathers cannot be brushed aside -- in fact, is plausible -- appellant first generation ever to attend school -- upon consideration of his claim with oral evidence collected by Scrutiny Committee from Punjab through Vigilance Officer confirming that his grandfather was of ‘nat’ caste, Scrutiny Committee fully justified in declaring that he belonged to ‘nat’ caste -- forefathers of appellant had migrated from Punjab to erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh much prior to coming into force of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 -- clause 3 of M. P. Government Circular, 2005 provides that persons settled in Madhya Pradesh after migration from other states shall be clubbed in category of inter-state migration only if they have migrated after SC/ST Presidential Order, 1950 -- therefore, appellant cannot be treated as migrant in terms of said clause -- verification certificate issued by Gram Panchayat Khara indicates that forefathers of appellant were of ‘nat’ caste -- OBC caste certificate of Keer caste already cancelled by Scrutiny Committee on premise that appellant belonged to ‘nat’ caste -- affirmed by subsequent Scrutiny Committee's order -- said decision remained unchallenged -- findings/deliberations recorded by Scrutiny Committee impeccable in nature and conclusion drawn sustainable in law. (1994) 6 SCC 241, (2012) 1 SCC 333 and (2012)1 SCC 113 followed. 2018 (3) JLJ 372 (SC) = (2018) 10 SCC 312 and (1990) 3 SCC 130 distinguished. [Paras 19, 21, 28 & 31
(6) Caste Certificate -- scope of power of Scrutiny Committee -- approach of Committee, keeping in view its object and constitution, should be inquisitorial, not adversarial -- it should not deal with matter as if it is Court trying criminal case where prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt -- its duty is to ascertain truth -- in doing so, it can record evidence and procure relevant documents -- it has to deal objectively and dispassionately with material including reports of police, revenue and vigilance authorities. W. P. No. 2074 of 2002 decided on 9.5.2003 affirmed in W. A. No. 407 of 2012 referred to. [Para 28
(7) Practice -- state of affairs shown to exist -- presumption of its continuity backward and forward can be drawn. [Para 21
(8) Constitution of India -- Arts. 226 and 20 -- scope of power -- double jeopardy -- FIR registered against appellant for offences punishable u/ss. 420, 467, 468, 471, 477 and 120B of IPC for obtaining ‘nat’ caste certificate quashed in MCrC -- direction given in writ petition to register FIR against him for allegedly procuring such caste certificate -- same allegations cannot be ordered to be subject matter of another FIR -- direction unsustainable and liable to be set aside. [Para 29
(9) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- jurisdiction -- impugned judgment is as if writ Court exercised appellate jurisdiction recording independent findings of facts substituting well-considered Scrutiny Committee report -- not permissible in exercise of jurisdiction under Art. 226 -- findings vulnerable on facts and in law -- impugned judgment suffers from vice of excessive jurisdiction -- set aside. (2018) 6 SCC 162 followed. [Para 32
¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & U;kf;d iqufoZyksdu dh O;kfIr & ;g vf/kdkfjrk ds ç;ksx dh jhfr ds lanHkZ esa Lokjksfir lhekvksa lfgr ukxfjdksa ds fof/kd vkSj ewy vf/kdkjksa ds çorZu ds ç;kstukFkZ vlk/kkj.k lkafo/kkfud 'kfDr gS & lkE;kiw.kZ ç—fr & U;k;] lkE;k rFkk 'kq) var%dj.k dh dlkSVh ij lko/kkuh ds lkFk ç;qDr fd, tkus ;ksX; & fof/klEer 'kklu }kjk fofu;fer yksdrkaf=d jkT; O;oLFkk dh lqj{kk ds fy, ijeikou vkSj vk/kkjHkwrA ¼iSjk 11½
¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & U;k;ky; dk drZO; & lkafo/kkfud U;k;ky; ij lafo/kku ds ewY;ksa vkSj turk ds vf/kdkjksa dh çfrj{kk dh xq: ckè;rk Mkyh xbZ gS & fof/klEer 'kklu cuk, j[kus ds fy, U;k;ky; dks U;kf;d :i ls vuqKs; lhekvksa ds Hkhrj dk;Z djuk vko';dA , vkb vkj 2000 ,l lh 3751 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 11½
¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & 'kfDr dh O;kfIr & lkafo/kkfud U;k;ky; ç'kklfud dkjZokbZ dh oS/krk] fof/kekU;rk rFkk vkSfpR; dk ijh{k.k 5 vk/kkjksa ij dj ldrk gS & (i) lafo/kku ds Hkkx rhu ds ewy vf/kdkjksa dk vfrØe.k] (ii) çkf/kdkj ;k vf/kdkfjrk dk vHkko ;k vfrjsd ¼dksje u‚u T;wfMl½] (iii) uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)karksa dk vfrØe.kA (iv) iwokZxzg vkSj vln~Hkko] rFkk (v) 'kfDr dk Nn~e ç;ksxA ¼iSjk 12½
¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & vf/kdkfjrk & mPpkf/kdkj tkfr laoh{kk lfefr ds çfrosnu vkSj flQkfj'kksa ij vk{ksi & lfefr us leLr rkfRod rF;ksa ij fopkj dj fu"d"kZ vfHkfyf[kr fd;k & ;|fi vihy U;k;ky; ds :i esa fHkUu jk; laHko gks ldrh gS rFkkfi ;g fu"d"kZ iyVus dk vk/kkj ugha gS & U;k;ky; dks ns[kuk gksrk gS fd lfefr us leLr lqlaxr lkexzh ij fopkj fd;k ;k ugha] vFkok mu lqlaxr rF;ksa ij euksfu;ksx ugha fd;k ftu ij ls lfefr us varr% viuk fu"d"kZ vfHkfyf[kr fd;k & lfefr U;k;ky; ;k vf/kdj.k dh Hk‚afr U;k;fu.kZ;u djus okyk çkf/kdj.k ugha vfirq ç'kklfud fudk; gS tks rF;ksa dk lR;kiu djrh gS] tkfr ds ntsZ ds fofufnZ"V nkoksa dk vUos"k.k djrh gS rFkk vfHkfuf'pr djrh gS fd nkok fd;k x;k tkfr@tutkfr dk ntkZ lgh gS ;k ugha & bl çdkjA vuqPNsn 226 ds v/khu laoh{kk lfefr dh foospukvksa vkSj fofu'p;ksa ds U;kf;d iqufoZyksdu dh O;kfIr lhfer ç—fr dh gSA ¼1994½ 6 ,l lh lh 241 rFkk ¼2012½ 1 ,l lh lh 333 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 12 ,oa 13½
¼5½ tkfr çek.ki= & vihykFkhZ ds firkeg us yxHkx 90&100 o"kZ iwoZ iatkc ls Xokfy;j jkT; esa çoztu fd;k & mlds dqVqac dk dksbZ lnL; fo|ky; ugha x;k vkSj og lc fuj{kj Fks & dksbZ Hkh yksd fu;kstu esa ugha jgk & vihykFkhZ ds bl dFku dks vuns[kk ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd mlds iwoZtksa dks tkfr çek.ki= vfHkçkIr djus dh vko';drk ugha Fkh & oLrqr%] lR;kHkklh gS & vihykFkhZ fo|ky; tkus okyh loZçFke ih<+h & mlds nkos ds lkFk laoh{kk lfefr }kjk lrdZrk vf/kdkjh ds ek/;e ls iatkc ls bldh iqf"V esa ,df=r ekSf[kd lk{; ij fopkj djus ij fd mlds firkeg ^uV* tkfr ds FksA laoh{kk lfefr }kjk ;g ?kksf"kr fd;k tkuk iw.kZr% U;k;ksfpr fd og ^uV* tkfr dk gS & vihykFkhZ ds iwoZtksa us lafo/kku ¼vuqlwfpr tkfr½ vkns'kA 1950 ds ço`Ùk gksus ds cgqr igys iatkc ls rRdkyhu e/; çns'k jkT; esa çoztu fd;k Fkk & e/; çns'k 'kklu ifji=] 2005 ds [kaM 3 esa micaf/kr fd vU; jkT;ksa ls çoztu ds i'pkr~ e/; çns'k esa cls O;fä rc gh varjjkT;h; çoztu dh dksfV esa j[ks tk,¡xs ;fn mUgksaus vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tutkfr jk"Vªifr vkns'k] 1950 ds mijkar çoztu fd;k gks & vr% vihykFkhZ dks mä [kaM ds vuqlkj çoklh ugha ekuk tk ldrk & xzke iapk;r [kkjk }kjk tkjh lR;kiu çek.ki= ls minf'kZr fd vihykFkhZ ds iwoZt ^uV* tkfr ds Fks & dhj tkfr dk vU; fiNM+k oxZ tkfr çek.ki= laoh{kk lfefr }kjk igys gh bl vk/kkj ij jn~n fd vihykFkhZ ^uV* tkfr dk gS & ijorhZ laoh{kk lfefr ds vkns'k }kjk vfHkiq"V & mä fofu'p; vuk{ksfir jgk & laoh{kk lfefr }kjk vfHkfyf[kr fu"d"kZ foospuk v=qV ç—fr ds rFkk fudkyk x;k fu"d"kZ fof/k esa leFkZuh;A ¼1994½ 6 ,l lh lh 241] ¼2012½ 1 ,l lh lh 333 rFkk ¼2012½ 1 ,l lh lh 113 vuqlfjrA 2018 ¼3½ ts ,y ts 372 ¼mPpre U;k;ky;½ % ¼2018½ 10 ,l lh lh 312 rFkk ¼1990½ 3 ,l lh lh 130 çHksfnrA ¼iSjk 19] 21] 28 ,oa 31½
¼6½ tkfr çek.ki= & laoh{kk lfefr dh 'kfä dh O;kfIr & lfefr dk mn~ns'; vkSj xBu –f"V esa j[krs gq,] mldk :[k ftKklq gksuk pkfg,] çfr}a}kRed ugha & mls ekeys ij ,sls fopkj ugha djuk pkfg, tSls fd og nkafMd ekeys dk fopkj.k djus okyk U;k;ky; gS] tgk¡ vfHk;kstui{k }kjk viuk i{kdFku ;qfDr;qDr lansg ds ijs lkfcr fd;k tkuk visf{kr gS & mldk drZO; lR; vfHkfuf'pr djus dk gS & ,slk djus esa og lk{; vfHkfyf[kr dj ldrk gS rFkk lqlaxr nLrkost mikIr dj ldrk gS & mls lkexzh ij oLrqfu"Brk ls vkSj fu"i{krk ls fopkj djuk gksrk gSA ftlesa iqfyl] jktLo vkSj lrdZrk çkf/kdkfj;ksa ds çfrosnu lfEefyr gksrs gSaA fjV vihy Øekad 407 lu~ 2012 esa vfHkiq"V fjV ;kfpdk Øekad 2074 lu~ 2002 fu.khZr fnukad 9-5-2003 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 28½
¼7½ çFkk & fdlh n'kk dk vfLrRo esa gksuk nf'kZr & ihNs vkSj vkxs mlds cus jgus dh mi/kkj.kk dh tk ldrh gSA ¼iSjk 21½
¼8½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 rFkk 20 & 'kfä dh O;kfIr & nksgjk ifjladV & ^uV* tkfr çek.ki= vfHkçkIr djus ds fy, naM lafgrk dh /kkjk 420] 467] 468] 471] 477 rFkk 120[k ds v/khu naMuh; vijk/kksa ds fy, vihykFkhZ ds fo:) jftLVªh—r çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ çdh.kZ nkafMd ekeys esa vfHk[kafMr & fjV ;kfpdk esa] vfHkdfFkrr% ,slk tkfr çek.ki= mikIr djus ds fy, mlds fo:) çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ jftLVªh—r djus dk funs'k fn;k x;k & mUgha vfHkdFkuksa dks ,d vU; çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ dh fo"k;oLrq cukus dk vkns'k ugha fn;k tk ldrk & funs'k leFkZu ;ksX; ugha rFkk vikLr fd, tkus ;ksX;A ¼iSjk 29½
¼9½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & vf/kdkfjrk & vkf{kIr fu.kZ; ,slk tSls fjV U;k;ky; us laoh{kk lfefr dk lqfopkfjr çfrosnu çfrLFkkfir djrs gq, rF;ksa dk Lora= fu"d"kZ vfHkfyf[kr dj vihy vf/kdkfjrk ç;qä dh & vuqPNsn 226 ds v/khu vf/kdkfjrk ds ç;ksx esa vuqKs; ugha & fu"d"kZ rF;ksa vkSj fof/k esa nks"kiw.kZ & vkf{kIr fu.kZ; vf/kdkfjrk ds vfrjsd ds nks"k ls xzLr & vikLrA ¼2018½ 6 ,l lh lh 162 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 32½
JUDGMENT
1. These appeals, under section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh (Uchcha Nyayalaya Ki Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, are directed against the impugned judgment dated 12.12.2022 passed in W.P. No.4794/2020 and, thus are being decided by this common judgment.
For the sake of convenience, reference to parties is in accordance with title of W.A. No.1668/2022.
2. The subject matter at issue relates to verification of caste certificate of appellant/respondent no.5 Jajpal Singh, a sitting MLA, who has been issued a certificate of Scheduled Caste treating his caste as “NAT” on 6.11.2008 i.e. about fifteen years ago. The NAT caste appears at S.No.41 in Madhya Pradesh as per The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.
The factual matrix of the case may be summarized thus :
(i) The appellant had obtained a caste certificate dated 2.12.1999 of “Keer” caste ; OBC in State of Madhya Pradesh and contested the election of Municipal Council, Ashoknagar.
(ii) One Baijnath Sahu filed W.P. No. 1330/2002 challenging the said caste certificate dated 2.12.1999. The writ Court disposed of the petition vide order dated 12.8.2002 with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent forum.
(iii) Complainant Baijnath then approached High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, inter alia stating that the certificate of OBC treating him to be of “Keer” caste was suspicious and deserved to be cancelled as the appellant had filed his nomination for Member, Jila Panchayat, on 13.5.1999 showing himself as “NAT (Bazigar”)/SC.
(iv) On 25.2.2004,the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee cancelled the caste certificate dated 2.12.1999 of OBC category (“Keer” caste) on the premise that he had obtained a certificate of NAT SC caste which was used by him as Member of Jila Panchayat.
(v) The said decision dated 25.2.2004 was challenged by appellant Jajpal Singh before this Court through W.P. No.520/2004. On 3.9.2004, the order dated 25.2.2004 was set aside as the same was found to have been passed by the Committee of 4 members instead of 6 members and the case was remanded with direction to decide it in accordance with law.
(vi) On 11.11.2004, the re-constituted Committee maintained the decision cancelling the caste certificate dated 2.12.1999.
(viii) It further appears that an FIR was registered against the appellant at Crime No. 161/10 at Police Station Ashoknagar under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477 and 120B of the IPC alleging fraud and mis-representation. However, the FIR was quashed by the High Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2050/2010 (Jajpal Singh v. State of M.P.) vide order dated 4.2.2022.
(ix) The appellant obtained caste certificate of Scheduled Caste from the Office of SDO, Ashoknagar, where his caste has been mentioned as “NAT” on 3.11.2008/6.11.2008.
(x) One Ramesh Kumar Itoriya challenged the caste certificate of appellant before the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for brevity “Scrutiny Committee”). The aforesaid Committee appears to have conducted an enquiry through Collector and Superintendent of Police, Ashoknagar without due notice to the appellant. On 16.9.2013, the High Level Committee found that in the land records since appellant’s caste was mentioned as “Sikh”, therefore “Nat” caste certificate was cancelled.
(xi) The aforesaid decision was challenged by the appellant by filing W.P. No.7047/2013 on the premise that the findings recorded are lopsided to his prejudice. Besides, neither any notice was issued nor opportunity of hearing was afforded to him to contest the challenge to his caste certificate and adduce evidence. Further, the Committee was not properly constituted as out of 4 members only 3 members had put their signatures in the order dated 16.9.2013. During pendency of writ petition, prayer for interim relief was rejected, against which appellant preferred W.A. No. 502/2013, wherein vide order dated 25.10.2013, the impugned order dated 16.9.2013 passed by the Scrutiny Committee was stayed upto final decision of writ peit
The central legal point established in the judgment is that a person with a case based on falsehood has no right to approach the Court, and knowingly producing fabricated and fraudulent documents to ....
(1) Reservation – Order passed by Scrutiny Committee which reflects due appreciation of evidence and application of mind and in absence of any allegation of bias/malice or lack of jurisdiction, distu....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of genuine reports from vigilance officers in caste certificate scrutiny and the binding nature of such reports on the Caste Ve....
Caste claim – Forged and fabricated - - Forefather of the respondent no.3 were “Sikh Chamar”, the respondent no.2 accepted the caste claim of the respondent no.3 as “Mochi” which is a separate caste ....
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
