Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 450 (JHR)

Sandeep Bakshi v. State of Jharkhand

2020-03-06

S.N.PATHAK

body2020
JUDGMENT : Heard the parties. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for restraining the respondents from disturbing him from discharging his duties in the capacity of Joint Secretary on the basis of caste certificate of the petitioner. 3. The facts of the case in short is that the petitioner is a member of Schedule Tribe and at present working as Joint Secretary under the Govt. of Jharkhand. The caste certificate to the petitioner was issued on 13.12.1983 by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi wherein he along with his siblings were shown to be belonging to Schedule Tribe category. It is the case of the petitioner that when for the purpose of appearing in State Civil Service Examination, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi denied to issue latest caste certificate in favour of petitioner, he moved to this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 3357 of 1992 (R), which was heard by a division bench of this Court and this Court, after hearing the parties, passed order on 23.02.1993 directing the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to issue caste certificate in favour of petitioner within a period of two months. In compliance of the order passed by this Court, the Deputy Commissioner issued caste certificate on 17.05.1993 (Annexure-1) in favour of petitioner and consequently, petitioner was appointed in State Administrative Service in erstwhile State of Bihar vide notification dated 23.05.1999 and later on, he was granted promotion in the rank of S.D.O. under ST category but surprisingly, he was denied promotion to the rank A.D.M., disputing his status as Scheduled Tribe, thus unsettling the issue already settled by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court. 4. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner preferred W.P. (S) No. 4721 of 2013, which was disposed of vide order dated 03.09.2014, holding therein that action of the Departmental Promotion Committee withholding promotion to the petitioner on the question of his status as Scheduled Tribe is not proper and it was also observed that it would be open to the respondent-State to refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to determine the status of the petitioner after following due procedure and after giving due opportunity to the petitioner to rebut the same. The aforesaid order dated 08.09.2014 was partly challenged in L.P.A. No. 368 of 2014 by the petitioner which was however, allowed to be withdrawn vide order dated 14.05.2015 (Annexure-5) with liberty to the appellant (present writ petitioner) to file an appropriate application before the competent forum after the outcome of Civil Review No.32 of 2010. 5. It is the further case of the petitioner that appointment of his brother namely, Sanjeet Bakshi in the State Administrative Services was challenged by one Piyush Lakra in W.P. (C) No. 2076 of 2003, disputing the status of Sanjeet Bakshi as a member of S.T. category, which was allowed on 26.11.2009 by this Court and accordingly, the Caste Certificate issued to the petitioner's brother Sanjeet Bakshi was invalidated. Subsequently Sanjeet Bakshi filed Civil review No.32 of 2010 which was allowed on 14.09.2016 and the original writ petition being W. P. (C) No. 2076 of 2003 was restored and thereafter the matter was heard afresh and the writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 07.12.2017 (Annexure-4) and the Caste Certificates dated 13.12.1989 and 17.05.1993 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi were held to be genuine and valid. However, when dispute has arisen on the status of petitioner as a member of S.T. category, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the caste certificate dated 13.12.1989 and 17.05.1993 are already held to be legal and valid by this Hon'ble Court in the writ application numbered as, W.P.(C) No. 2076 of 2003 (Annexure-4) and the caste status of the petitioner and his brother has already been authenticated by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.02.1993 (Annexure-2). Since the matter has already been settled by this Hon'ble Court and caste status of the petitioner as Scheduled Tribe has been validated and as such, no review of the same by the State Machineries is permissible in the eyes of law. Since the matter has already been settled by this Hon'ble Court and caste status of the petitioner as Scheduled Tribe has been validated and as such, no review of the same by the State Machineries is permissible in the eyes of law. Learned counsel further submits that the action of the respondent-authorities in denying the promotion to the petitioner to the rank of A.D.M. is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and as such, a direction be given to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the said post treating the caste certificate issued to the petitioner by the competent authority to be valid and genuine. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent-State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that matter relating to enquiry of the caste of petitioner and two others has been already been referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee vide memo No. 11523 dated 20.11.2017, which is pending before the said Committee. Learned counsel further argues that the respondents have not disturbed the petitioner from discharging his duties and petitioner is still working to the post of Joint Secretary. Learned counsel for the respondents further argues that respondents have also sent reminder vide memo No. 5404 dated 19.07.2018 and memo No. 8967 dated 10.11.2018 to the Cast Scrutiny Committee for report relating the caste status of the petitioner but till date no such report has been received in this regard. 8. Be that as it may, on a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, this Court is of the considered opinion that the issue involved in the instant writ application has already been elaborately dealt with in W.P.(S). No. 4721 of 2013 (Sandeep Bakshi vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and is now no more res-integra. However, as the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.09.2014 has directed the respondents to refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to determine the caste status of the petitioner, after following the procedure prescribed in case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Addl. However, as the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.09.2014 has directed the respondents to refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to determine the caste status of the petitioner, after following the procedure prescribed in case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors., reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241 and in compliance thereof, the respondents have already referred the matter relating to verification of the caste of petitioner to the Caste Scrutiny Committee vide memo No. 11523 dated 20.11.2017, which is pending before the said Committee and though many reminders have also been sent, as admitted by the respondents, for getting the report of the said Committee but till date the same has not been received. From perusal of para-10 of the counter-affidavit, it appears that the respondents have not disturbed the petitioner from discharging his duties as an Officer and the petitioner is still working to the post of Joint Secretary. 9. For the ends of justice, it would be proper to direct the Caste Scrutiny Committee to come-out with the report within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in the meantime, the petitioner be allowed to continue to discharge his duties on the said post. Let it be made clear that promotion of the petitioner shall depend on the report of the Caste Scrutiny Committee. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 11. As a sequel to the disposal of the instant writ application, pending I.As., if any, also stands disposed of.