Caste verification must rely on cumulative evidence, prioritizing authentic pre-Independence records over minor nomenclature variations. Authorities cannot discredit valid claims using non-existent categories or ignore favorable affinity reports, particularly when a long-standing caste status is challenged without proof of fraud.

NAFR

Order on Board

27.03.2026

1. In the present petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25.01.2020 passed by the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, whereby the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled and the concerned authorities have been directed to take appropriate steps in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 9(3) of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 and under Rules 23(3), 23(5) and 24(1) of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Rules, 2013. By way of this petition, the petitioner is challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the aforesaid impugned order.

2. The petitioners have filed this Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:-

10.1 That the petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays to this Hon'ble Court to issue appropriate writ/order/direction for quashment of impugned order dated 25.1.2020 contained in ANNEXURE-P/1.

10.2 That the petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays to this Hon'ble Court to issue appropriate writ/order/direction to hold that the caste certificate issued to the petitioner contained in ANNEXURE-P/2 as valid.

10.3 Any other relief whatsoever, this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioner.”

3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner was issued a caste certificate by the competent authority certifying him to be a member of Scheduled Caste namely “Mahar”, which is a notified Scheduled Caste under clause (1) of Article 341 of the Constitution of India in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and continues to remain so in the State of Chhattisgarh after its bifurcation. That, on the basis of his educational qualifications and the benefit of his social status as a Scheduled Caste candidate, the petitioner was appointed by respondent No. 2 on 24.01.1983 and is presently serving as Lecturer at Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Daundilohara, District Balod (Chhattisgarh). That, in the year 2013, a vague complaint was made against the petitioner along with 17 other persons alleging illegal appointment on the basis of forged caste certificates. Pursuant to the said complaint, preliminary enquiries were conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), District Balod and the District Level Scrutiny Committee and the matter was thereafter referred on 06.02.2013 to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. That, the said Committee initiated an enquiry through the Vigilance Cell and Investigation Assistant. The Vigilance Cell, on the basis of documentary evidence, raised certain objections and arrived at an erroneous conclusion by introducing a non-existent caste category termed “Baya Mahara”, despite no such entry being found in any of the documents. That, simultaneously, the Investigation Assistant conducted a detailed enquiry including examination of the petitioner’s ancestral profession, mother tongue, family deities and social status and submitted a report affirming that the petitioner shares identical social status with members of the “Mahar” community. That, despite such affirmative findings, the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, without properly considering the report of the Investigation Assistant and ignoring relevant material on record, passed the impugned order dated 25.01.2020 cancelling the petitioner’s caste