Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 24827
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Dr. Ulhas Gonnade – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
WPS No. 8761 of 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.S. Marhas, Shruti Bariar
For the Respondents: Amit Buxy
Once a specific statute is enacted to govern the verification of caste certificates, judicial directions issued to fill a legislative vacuum cease to operate, and the statutory procedure for jurisdiction must be strictly followed.
Headnote:(A) Jurisdiction of Scrutiny Committee - Act of 2013 - The High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee can only take cognizance of social status certificates if referred by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee or the State Government; any order passed without such referral is without jurisdiction. (Para 12, 13, 15)
(B) Legal Vacuum and Legislation - Transition from Judicial Directions - Directions issued by the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil to fill a legislative vacuum cease to apply once an appropriate statute is enacted, and the provisions of the enactment prevail. (Para 9, 10, 11)
Issues: Whether the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee had the jurisdiction to annul the petitioner's caste certificate under the Act of 2013 despite the lack of referral from the District Level Committee or State Government.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the annulment of a caste certificate and subsequent termination of service based on jurisdictional grounds. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the cessation of jurisdiction of the erstwhile committee upon the enactment of the 2013 act. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. judicial directions issued to fill a legislative vacuum cease to apply once a specific statute is enacted. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. the high power certification scrutiny committee's jurisdiction is strictly limited to referrals by the district level committee or the state government. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. orders passed by a committee without statutory jurisdiction are void and liable to be quashed. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
Order on Board
1. This writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 14.02.2019 (Annexure P-2) by which the caste certificate issued to the petitioner on 21.12.1978 has been annulled. Consequently, the services of the petitioner has also been terminated by order dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure P-1).
2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop :-
(i) The Chhattisgarh Adivasi Vikas Parishad, Raipur, by letter dated 04.12.2008 referred the case of the petitioner to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee constituted as per the directions issued by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Kumari Madhuri Patil v. State of Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development 1(1994) 6 SCC 241, for verification of petitioner’s social status certificate dated 21.12.1978 in Scheduled Tribe category.
(ii) While the verification of caste scrutiny remained pending with the above-stated Committee, the Act of 2013 came into force with effect from 29/04/2013 wherein it has been provided that the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 7 of the Act of 2013 will have the jurisdiction for conducting enquiry into social status certificate of a person only in two cases, firstly when it is referred by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee constituted under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 and secondly, by the State Government. However, the Act of 2013 as well as Section 7 of the Act is silent with regard to pending complaints with the erstwhile committee constituted as per the directions of the Supreme Court in the matter of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra).
(iii) The High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, as constituted under Section 7 of the Act of 2013 , took cognizance of the above-stated complaint, even though it was neither referred by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee nor by the State Government, presumably on the premises that it was pending on the date of constitution of the Committee under Section 7 of the Act of 2013 and passed the impugned order dated 14/02/2019 (Annexure P/2) by rejecting the petitioner’s social status certificate issued on 21.12.1978. Consequently, the petitioner was terminated from his service by order dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure P-1), against which this writ petition has been preferred.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that after coming into force of the Act of 2013 , the direction contained in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) has come to an end, therefore, cognizance taken by the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee as on 14/02/2019 (Annexure P/2) on the petitioner’s complaint i.e. way after coming into force of the Act of 2013 w.e.f. 29/04/2013, and thereby, annulling the social status certificate of the petitioner is totally unsustainable and bad in law as after coming into force of the Act of 2013 . The High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 7 of the Act of 2013 can only take cognizance for verification of social status certificate in two cases, either if it is referred by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee or if it is referred by the State Government and in no other case apart from these, therefore, the impugned order (Anne
