Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1246 (MP)

Vandana Khairwar v. State of M. P.

2012-12-04

R.S.JHA

body2012
ORDER 1. The petititoner has filed this petititon being aggrieved by the show cause notice issued to her on 16.3.2003 seeking a reply from the petitioner in respect of complaint received by the authorities regarding issuance of a false caste certificate to the petitioner. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner infact belongs to the Khairwar, Scheduled Caste Community, but is being unnecessarily harassed on account of false complaint. It is further submitted that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others, AIR 1995 SC 94 , the State Government, pursuant to the notification, constituted a State Level High Court Power Committee for making an enquiry into the allegations of issuance of false caste certificate and in such circumstances the Collector or the Sub Divisional Officer, as the case may be, has no power or authority to make enquiry into the matter as the only competent authority to enquire into the same is the State Level High Power Committee. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further pointed out that the petitioner has filed documents at page 64 to the rejoinder to the petition which is a letter dated 28.7.2003 sent by the District Organizer, Tribal Welfare Department, who had been directed by the Collector to conduct an enquiry against the petitioner, wherein the authority has returned the matter back to the Collector for transmitting the same to the State Level High Power Committee for enquiry but no further proceedings thereafter have been taken by the authorities. 3. The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State submits that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 21.7.2003, the authorities have not taken any further proceedings and the matter is pending as it is. 4. 3. The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State submits that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 21.7.2003, the authorities have not taken any further proceedings and the matter is pending as it is. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account the letter of the District Organizer, Tribal Welfare, Rewa dated 28.7.2003 as well as the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) and the circulars issued by the State Government, the petition filed by the petitioner, as far as it assails the proposed enquiry by the Collector, is allowed and is disposed of with a direction to the Collector, Rewa to transmit the matter to the State Level High Power Committee for enquiry, if necessary. 5. It is further observed that in case the authorities proposes to transmit the matter to the State Level High Power Committee, they shall do it within four weeks of receving a certified copy of this order and the State Level High Power Committee shall thereafter decide the matter expeditiously in accordance with law after giving notice and hearing to the petitioner and keeping in mind the fact that the complaint is of the year 2003. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted liberty to assail the denial of promotion to the petitioner in separate proceedings, if so advised. 7. With the aforesaid direction and liberty, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. In the facts of the case there shall be no orders as to costs.