IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION No.10108/2011 (GM-CC)
BETWEEN:
PANDURANGA,
S/O. KALOJI RAO,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
WORKING AS POST MASTER,
MULKI POST OFFICE,
R/O. KOLLUR VILLAGE,
MANGALORE TALUK
DISTRICT: MANGALORE.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULED TRIBE
WELFARE AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
KRISHI BHAVAN, 2ND FLOOR,
HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE – 560 001.
2.
THE DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE,
BY ITS PRESIDENT,
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
SOUTH KANARA,
MANGALORE.
3.
THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE
OFFICER AND MEMBER,
CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE,
SOUTH CANARA,
MANGALORE.
- 2 -
4.
THE TAHASILDAR & MEMBER,
DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE,
SOUTH CANARA,
MANGALORE.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI C. JAGADISH, SPL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS & QUASH THE ORDER DATED
07.02.2002 BY THE R2 AS PER ANNEXURE–S; AND QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 19.01.2011, PASSED BY THE R-1 AS PER
ANNEXURE–T.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
The present writ petition is filed questioning the
legality
and
correctness
of
the
order
dated
07/02/2002, in No.G SA KAA:TA SA:CR:75/2001-02
as per Annexure – S, passed by 2nd respondent and
quash the order dated 19/01/2011 passed by 1st
respondent, in Appeal No.DSTW/Appeal/CR-13/2004
as per Annexure – T.
- 3 -
Brief facts arising in this writ petition are
that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Kollur
Village, Mulki Hobli, Mangalore and belongs to “Marati”
Community, which is classified as Scheduled Tribe in
South Canara District. According to the petitioner, the
notification clearly indicates that “Marati” caste in
South Canara District is classified as Scheduled Tribe
as per the Notification dated 11/12/1986 issued by
Government of Karnataka, Social Welfare and Labour
Department. It is stated by the petitioner that
Tahsildar,
Mangalore
by
its
certificate
dated
29/03/1999 has declared the petitioner as the person
belonging to ‘Marati Community’, a Scheduled Tribe of
Dakshina Kannada (South Canara) Karnataka. It is
further stated that the certificate has also been issued
by the Head Master of the High School stating that the
petitioner belongs to ‘Marati Community’ which is a
Scheduled Tribe of Dakshina Kannada (South Canara)
- 4 -
and the respondent authorities also issued certificate
to family and relatives of the petitioner to the effect
that they belong to ‘Marati’ Community a Scheduled
Tribe of Dakshina Kannada (South Canara). This
being the state of affairs, 2nd respondent issued notice
directing 3rd respondent/Tahsildar to verify the caste
of the petitioner. Subsequently, another notice was
issued on 03/10/2001 by Social Welfare Department
to appear before Caste Verification Committee for an
enquiry on 28/01/2002 and accordingly statement of
the petitioner was recorded. The Caste Verification
Committee/2nd
respondent
vide
order
dated
07/02/2002 held that the petitioner does not belong
to ‘Marati’ Community a Scheduled Tribe in Dakshina
Kannada (South Canara) Karnataka but belongs to
‘Maratha Kshatriya Community’ and is not entitled to
the benefits available to Scheduled Tribe and directed
the District Administrator to initiate the action.
- 5 -
Aggrieved by the order dated 07/02/2002 the
petitioner preferred appeal before the Divisional
Commissioner, since Divisional Commissioner came to
be abolished, W.P. No.25658/2002 preferred before
this Court and the same was disposed of with a
direction to file an appeal within two months before
the Director for Tribal Welfare, Bangalore.
The appeal preferred by the petitioner
before the appellate authority-1st respondent came to
be dismissed and order of the Caste Verification
Committee was upheld.
Aggrieved
by
the
said
orders,
the
petitioners are before this Court.
5.
Heard Sri P. Prasanna Kumar, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.Jagadish, Special
Government Advocate for respondents.
- 6 -
6.
In addition to various grounds urged by
learned counsel in the petition, it is the contention of
the learned counsel that materials furnished by the
petitioner has not been considered while proceeding to
hold enquiry under Rule 3A (3) of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Community (Reservation of Appointments
Etc.,) Rules, 1992 and procedure as envisaged in the
said rules has not been followed before passing the
said order. It is prime contention of learned counsel
that all the members of the committee have not
signed the order at Annexure-S and it is only the
Chairman who has signed the order and would
contend that the Rule 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Community (Reservation of Appointments Etc.,) Rules,
1992
enumerates
that
the
Caste
Verification
Committee consisting of four members and all the
- 7 -
members need to sign the order. In view of this, it is
contended that the impugned orders passed by the
Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the appellate
authority is not s