ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs:

“To call for records and issue writ or direction or order or any other writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 18.07.2018 passed in Appeal No.CR7/2016-17 dated

18.07.2018 (Annexure-A) etc.”

2. Sri Kashinath J.D., learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner entered service of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (‘KSRTC’ for short) as Divisional Security Inspector, in 1984 and after 36 years of service retired in 2020, as Class-1 Officer (Super Timescale). It was submitted that due to nature of his job as Vigilance Officer, petitioner conducted investigations against corrupt officials of KSRTC and based on his reports several employees were dismissed from service. It was submitted that with intention of wrecking vengeance against him for above reason, some of such employees filed complaint with Civil Rights Enforcement Cell ('CRE Cell' for short), disputing his caste status, even though he was appointed in 1984 under General Merit category. It was submitted that petitioner belonged to Beda-Valmiki caste, which was not Scheduled Tribes (‘ST’ for short) when he underwent schooling. Therefore his school records do not mention him as belonging to ST. It was submitted that subsequent to inclusion of Beda-Valmiki-Nayaka and other synonymous castes in ST in 1991, he obtained relevant certificates and availed promotions. It was submitted that horoscope of petitioner's father of year 1930, mentioned name of his grandfather as Bedara Kariappa. It was submitted that said document was submitted to Mysore State Electricity Board (MSEB) on 07.01.1950 at time of appointment as Lineman, as horoscope was considered proof of person's caste, date of birth etc. It was submitted that petitioner secured his father's service records from concerned authorities by filing applications under RTI Act, later. And further that same was verified by Investigating Officer, service Book of his father mentioned his caste as ‘Beda (Valmiki)’.

3. It was further submitted that school records of petitioner's elder brother Sri Kumar S/o Lakshmana, who studied Class-I in Government Higher Primary School, Kalehalli, during 1962-63, showed his caste as ‘Valmiki’, while school admission records of petitioner of Class-I and II at Government Higher Primary School, Holalur Taluk, Shimoga District, also showed caste as ‘Valmiki’. Even school admission records of his other brothers Kumar, Nagaraj and Chandrakanth, who studied at same school showed their caste as ‘Valmiki’. Subsequent school records from Government Primary School, Daskoppa, Anandapura, Sagara Taluka were likewise.

4. But, school records of Primary Boys School, Ripponpet, where he studied Class-III upon his father’s transfer, incorrectly showed his caste as 'Palyagar' due to clerical error by school staff and same continued in later school records. At Government High School, Surahonne, it was shown as 'Poliyagar' and there was error in his name as Jayappa L, instead as Jayanna L. It was submitted that during investigation, I.O. visited petitioner's ancestral village Nyamthi, Honnali Taluk and obtained statements of residents, collected school admission records of petitioner and his siblings and Service Book of his father. It was submitted that IO’s report mentioned that Rachappa (Petitioner's uncle), his brother Ramanna (Petitioner's second uncle) lived in Valmiki Street, Nyamthi, while Lakshmana (Petitioner's father) had left village on employment with MSEB. It mentioned that Rachappa, Ramanna and Petitioner's father belonged to Valmiki caste, but petitioner and his siblings belonged to Poliyagar or Palegar caste and not to Nayaka or Valmiki caste. It was contended that such conclusion was perverse, especially, when petitioner's father, uncles and his siblings belonged to Valmiki caste. Said conclusion ignored report of Tahsildar, Honnali and Deputy Tahsildar, Nyamthi, who had conducted spot panchnama an