IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.
Chouhan Devanand – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 16607 of 2025
Decided On : 29-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. caste claims based on political motives and unsustainable ancestral ties. (Para 2) |
| 2. enquiries conducted adhered to statutory requirements ensuring proper verification. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. cancellation of caste certificates validated due to procedural compliance and lack of proof of st status. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.
Petitioners question the Proceedings dated 28-05-2025 of the 3rd respondent cancelling the caste certificates issued by the 5th respondent in their favour, which were renewed from time to time. Consequently, a direction is sought to set aside the same.
2. On behalf of petitioners, the 1st petitioner stated that his grandfather, late Chouhan Ganapathi, belonged to ST Lambada community and was married to Subhadra of the same community. Their sons were Chouhan Kishan and Chouhan Sripathi. The 1st petitioner’s father, Chouhan Kishan, belonged to ST Lambada community and resided at Dignur Village, Bazarhathnoor Mandal, Adilabad District. He married Jadhav Harnabai, daughter of late Jadhav Dagudu of Harkapur Village, Indervelly Mandal, also of the ST Lambada community. The said couple had seven children — Chouhan Devanand, Chouhan Shyamanand, Chouhan Jamunabai, Chouhan Sadanand, Chouhan Gajananand, Chouhan Namachand, and Chouhan Vijay.
2.1. The 1st petitioner resides at Itchoda Village and Mandal, Adilabad District and has two wives: (1) Jadhav Godavari, daughter of Jadhav Sampathi of Mediguda Village, belonging to the ST Lambada community, with whom he has five children including petitioners 2, 3 and 7, and (2) Pawar Saya Bai, daughter of Pawar Narayana of Sathnala Village, Jainath Mandal, also belonging to the ST Lambada community, with whom he has three children — petitioners 4, 5, and 6.
2.2. It is stated, the 1st petitioner’s maternal grandfather, Jadhav Dagudu, belonged to ST Lambada community of Harkapur Village, Indervelly Mandal. His maternal uncle, Jadhav Hari Chand of the same community, married Ranibai of Sambajiguda, Jainur, Adilabad District, and their son, Jadhav Prakash, resides in Mumbai, being a native of Sambajiguda, Jainur, Asifabad District.
2.3. While so, it is stated, the 1st petitioner contested the Local Body Elections for MPTC, elected from Itchoda Mandal, and served as Vice-MPP from 2013 to 2018 in a seat reserved for ST. The 2nd petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Itchoda Gram Panchayat for 2007–2012, and the 4th petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of the same Panchayat for the periods 2013–2018 and 2019–2024 in a seat reserved for ST. It is asserted that all the petitioners are cultivating their agricultural lands situated at Itchoda Village and earning their livelihood while rendering public service as Sarpanch and MPTC without any interruption or allegations from any corner.
2.4. Whenever the 1st petitioner approached the All India Banjara Seva Sangh, Adilabad District for issuance of a community certificate for obtaining caste certificates from the Tahsildar, the organization issued such certificates recognizing him and his family as belonging to ST Lambada community. While so, in 2007, one Sri Kotnak Sathpath Rao, President of District Raj Gond Seva Samithi, Adilabad District, made a complaint dated 10-04-2007 before the official respondents requesting cancellation of caste certificate of the 2nd petitioner. Upon consideration of the records, the 5th respondent submitted a report to the 4th respondent stating that the complaint lodged by Sri Sathpath Rao was untenable. This clearly indicates that the said complaint was politically-motivated and lodged out of grudge. Subsequently, the 6th respondent, who is the President of All India Banjara Seva Sangh, Adilabad District made another complaint alleging that they obtained false caste certificates and availed benefits of MPTC and Sarpanch positions at Itchoda. Based on this complaint, notices were issued to the 1st petitioner, who submitted explanation before the respondents. Without considering the same properly
The court upheld the cancellation of caste certificates based on a lack of valid documentation supporting claims to Scheduled Tribe status, emphasizing adherence to statutory due process.
The court upheld the cancellation of Caste Certificates for lack of evidence supporting ST-Lambada status and confirmed adherence to principles of natural justice during proceedings.
The court emphasized the necessity for fair inquiry processes and the principle of inherited social status in inter-caste marriages, ruling that the petitioner was wrongly denied Scheduled Tribe stat....
A person who fraudulently obtains a caste certificate by misrepresenting facts is not entitled to the benefits reserved for the caste or community mentioned in the certificate.
The Sub-Divisional Officer lacks jurisdiction to cancel caste certificates; only the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee can do so after following due process.
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 ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.