ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 18-04-2023 The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 30.05.2015 passed by the Circle OfÏcer, Chainpur, District- Bhabhua i.e. the respondent no. 8, whereby and whereunder the caste certificates of the petitioners have been cancelled, which were issued by him on

28.08.2014.

2. The short point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that first of all the aforesaid order dated 30.05.2015, is an ex-parte order and no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners before passing of the same and secondly, after rendering of the Judgment by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors. reported in (1994)6 SCC 241, directing all the State Governments to constitute a Caste Scrutiny Committee, whereafter, in the State of Bihar also a Caste Scrutiny Committee has been constituted, the Circle OfÏcer, or for that matter any state authorities are precluded from cancelling the caste certificate of the petitioners, and in case the authorities are of the view that the same warrants cancellation, they have to approach the Bihar State Caste Scrutiny Committee for the said purpose.

3. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to a judgment dated 21.06.2022, rendered by a learned Division Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 19084 of 2021 (Baidhnath Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Others), wherein it has been held that the Circle OfÏcer is not a competent authority to cancel the caste certificate of the petitioners, rather it is the Caste Scrutiny Committee constituted by the State Government, which is empowered to do so.

4. In this connection, it would be apt to refer to paragraphs no. 10 to 13 of the said judgment rendered in the case of Baidhnath Singh (supra) hereinbelow:-

“10. In Farzana Sabaff vs. the State of Bihar & Ors. since reported in 2014 (3) BBCJ 631, a dispute relating to disqualification on the ground of invalid caste certificate came before this Court. It would be manifest from the perusal of the Para-11 of the judgment of the said case that in the counter afÏdavit the State had admitted that a committee was duly constituted pursuant to the direction no.4 given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra). Para 11 of the judgment in Farzana Sabaff (supra) is extracted hereunder for ready reference:

"11. Counter afÏdavits have been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and also the respondent no. 4 defending the impugned order passed by the Collector. On the issue of constitution of scrutiny committee, raised by the petitioner during earlier hearings, a counter afÏdavit was also filed on behalf of the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar stating that the State Government in compliance of the direction of the Apex Court contained in Civil Appeal No. 5854 of 1994 (Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, Scheduled Tribes), has already constituted a Directorate/Committee dealing with the cases of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes vide memo no. 3887 dated 08.11.2007 However, on a question being asked to learned Additional Advocate General No. 11 as to whether a Committee of Directorate formed for concerned purpose for scrutiny of the certificate with respect to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes would be able to verify the certificate granted to the Backward Classes or Extremely Backward Classes, an apparent lacunae appeared and adjournment was sought for rectification specially in view of the direction no. 4 given by the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) that for scrutiny of Backward Classes certificate the committee would have to be constituted consisting an Additional or Joint Secretary or any ofÏcer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal (sic) Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, has not been included in the committee. Therea