ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the impugned judgment and order dated 05/07.02.2023 allowing Writ Petition (Criminal) No.122/2020 filed by respondent No.1 - Lala Saurabh Verma, is contrary to law and cannot be sustained. 3. The First Information Report (FIR) in question, that is, FIR No.08/2018 was registered against respondent No.1 - Lala Saurabh Verma, on 06.06.2018 at Police Station - Sector IV, Sub-Division - Chas, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 25(1A) of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (For short, "SC/ST Act"). At the time of registration of the FIR, notification No.7/S.C.S.T.-06/2007-5165 dated 24.11.2012 issued by the Department of Home, Government of Jharkhand, was in force and officers of the level of Inspector and Sub-Inspector were authorized to conduct the investigation under the SC/ST Act. 4. By a subsequent notification bearing No.11/Court Case- 16/2018-3812 dated 10.07.2018, the notification dated 24.11.2012 was withdrawn. Henceforth, the officers of the level of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy. S.P.) were/are authorized to conduct investigation under the SC/ST Act. 5. This Court in State of Bihar & Ors. vs. Anil Kumar & Ors., 2017(14) SCC 304 , has examined the interplay between the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 (For short, "SC/ST Rules".) and the notification issued by the State Government and held that Section 9(1)(b) of the SC/ST Act confers on the State Government the power to further delegate the power to arrest, investigation and prosecution. This power vested with the State Government, through a non obstante clause, cannot be neutralised by any rule framed under Section 23 of the SC/ST Act. The non obstante clause would allow a State Government to exercise the power conferred on it irrespective of the provisions of the SC/ST Act, and irrespective of the provisions of the SC/ST Rules. 6. It is also pointed out that post the issue of the notification dated 10.07.2018, the investigation was carried out by the Dy. S.P. and the charge sheet was filed by him. 7. 6. It is also pointed out that post the issue of the notification dated 10.07.2018, the investigation was carried out by the Dy. S.P. and the charge sheet was filed by him. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order dated 05/07.02.2023, quashing the proceedings for lack of competence of the authorized officer carrying out the investigation, is set aside. The prosecution/proceedings will continue in accordance with law. 8. We clarify that we have not made any observations/comments or given any findings on the merits of the case. 9. To cut short delay, parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 08.11.2023, when a date of hearing will be fixed. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.