2026:CGHC:11407 RUKHSAR BANO NAFR RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.03.12 10:44:47 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 994 of 2026

1 - K. Rama Yashwant S/o K. Narsingh, Aged About 49 Years O/o. Principal, Government Higher Secondary School Arrabor- Sukma, District Sukma C.G.

... Petitioner versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur C.G.

2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Tribal Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

3 - Director, Tribal Research And Training Institute, Sector-24, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

4 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur C.G.

5 - Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Department, Through Collector-

Bijapur, District Bijapur C.G.

6 - President/ Member/ Secretary District Level Certificate Verification Committee, District Bijapur C.G.

7 - Office Of The Research Officer, Tribal Research And Training Institute, Regional Unit, Jagdalpur, District Bastar C.G.

8 - The District Education Officer, Sukma, District Sukma C.G.

9 - Salvam Rajrao, Village- Phandiguda, Post- Injaram, Tehsil- Konta, District Sukma C.G.

... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Lav Kumar Ramteke, Advocate For State/Respondent Nos.1 to 8 : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. Adv. General (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

Order on Board

10/03/2026

1. This petition has been preferred by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records from the respondents.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari and quash the impugned order Annexure P/1 dated 18/11/2025.

10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to direct the respondents No. 1 to 8, should be stopped for further action.

10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief or pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as a Panchayat Teacher under the Scheduled Tribe category in the year 2002 and is presently working in the Education Department as Principal at Government Higher Secondary School Arrabor-Sukma, District Sukma (CG). He further submits that the caste of the petitioner is ‘Mannewar’. However, on account of a complaint made by respondent No.9, the District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, Bijapur (henceforth referred to as “DLCS Committee”) conducted an inquiry into the matter and, vide impugned order dated 18.11.2025 (Annexure - P/1), held that the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner is doubtful/wrong. Thus, the DLCS Committee itself did not arrive at a clear cut finding as to whether the said caste certificate is valid or not. Despite the same, the DLCS committee cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner issued by the Tahsildar, Bhopalpatnam in Revenue Case No.317/B-121/92/ dated 17/08/92. He next submits that the DLCS Committee has no power to cancel the caste certificate/social status certificate. Rather, if it finds prima facie that the caste certificate/social status certificate has been obtained wrongfully or fraudulently, it has to refer the matter to the State Level High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter referred to as “HPCS Committee”) under Section 6 (3) of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (henceforth referred to as “the Act, 2013”), as the power to cancel the caste certificate/social status certificate is vested only with the HPCS Committee under Section 8 of the Act, 2013. Hence, learned counsel submits that, at this stage, the present writ petition may be d