Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 400 (CHH)

B. Naglaxmi, W/o Malaiya v. State of Chhattisgarh

2023-08-11

PARTH PRATEEM SAHU

body2023
ORDER : 1. Petitioners have filed this petition aggrieved with the letter dated 26.06.2023, issued by respondent No.3 directing petitioners for submission of documents for verification of the caste by the District Level Document Verification Committee and have prayed for following relief (s):- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order, thereby setting-aside/quashing the impugned orders-cum-notice dated 26.06.2023 (Annexure P/1). 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 1. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners belong to Manepod (Mannewar) community and the caste Mannewar comes under category of Scheduled Tribe in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and also in the State of Chhattisgarh. Petitioners have submitted an application for grant of Social Status Certificate before the competent authority and the competent authority after due enquiry has issued caste certificate in favour of petitioners. Petitioners have also applied for government job based on the caste certificate and become successful. After verification of the documents petitioners were appointed. On the basis of complaint, Sub-Divisional Officer has canceled the caste certificates issued in favour of petitioners and consequent to the cancellation of caste certificate, respondent No.2 cancelled the appointment of petitioners. Order of cancellation of appointment was challenged before the Chhattisarh State Scheduled Tribe Commission, Raipur and Commission considering the entirety of the facts of the case have recommended for reinstatement of petitioners, which is also after due enquiry with regard to social status of petitioner. After recommendation of the Commission, the execution of the order of termination issued by respondent No.2 was stayed. 2. It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioners that when Commission after enquiry of the social status of petitioners has recommended for their reinstatement observing that the issue with regard to Mannewar caste to be scheduled tribe is pending consideration before the State Scheduled Tribe Commission, Raipur and it is the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee constituted by the State of Chhattisgarh for enquiring into the caste certificate, and therefore, the letter issued by respondent No.3 is without any authority of law. He submits that the State Government had issued a circular dated 24.09.2013 issuing guidelines/instructions for issuance of social status certificate of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class candidates, for verification and for cancellation. Referring to Clause -5 of the circular it is argued that once the caste certificate has been issued by the competent authority after due enquiry, the aggrieved party could have challenged the caste certificate in an appeal before the authority prescribed and the respondent No.3 is not the authority prescribed as an appellate authority. He also submits that in the identical facts of the case, interim order of stay is passed by this Court in WPS No. 1046 of 2020 and the writ petition filed by petitioners in WPC N. 717 of 2017 and other connected matters, the notice issued to petitioners therein by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) has been held to be without jurisdiction. Lastly he contended that even if the caste certificate is to be verified then it can only be done by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ku. Madhuri Patil and Another Vs. Additional Commissioner, reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 and in case of Kavita Solunke Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in (2012) 8 SCC 430 . 3. Learned counsel for the State opposing the submission of learned counsel for petitioners would submit that the notice is issued by respondent No.3, who is Member-Secretary of the District Level Certificate Verification Committee. By this letter petitioners were asked to submit the relevant documents for verifying the caste. On the basis of some complaint received by District Level Certificate Verification Committee, the notice is issued in exercise of powers under Section 6 of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification), Act 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2013”). District Level Certificates Verification Committee is a statutory Committee. Under the Act, the Committee constituted under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 is having the jurisdiction to verify the certificate issued by the competent authority on its own motion or on receipt of any information or reference made to it. The contents of letter would show that some information is received by the Committee that certificates obtained by petitioners are forged. The contents of letter would show that some information is received by the Committee that certificates obtained by petitioners are forged. It is also contented that petitioners have already submitted their reply before respondent No.3 and it will be considered in accordance with law applicable and appropriate order will be passed. The impugned letter does not call for any interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Writ petition is filed by three petitioners but from perusal of document (Annexure P-1) would show that letter issued to petitioner No.1 and 2 is only annexed. The letter issued, if any, to petitioner No.3 has not been placed on record. The contents of letter (Annexure P-1) mentions that for verification of the caste documentary evidence is to be placed. It also mentions that complaint was received of getting employment based on the forged caste certificate and the matter is to be placed before the District Level Certificates Verification Committee and therefore, the noticee shall produce the documents mentioned therein. The letter is signed by Assistant Commissioner-cum-Member Secretary of District Level Certificates Verification Committee.6. To appreciate the submission of leaned counsel for petitioners that even if the caste is to be verified then it can only be done by the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, I find it appropriate to glance the provisions under the Act of 2013 and the rules framed thereunder. The object of enactment of the Act of 2013 is as under :- “An Act to protect the interest of persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of citizens in the State from those who fraudulently obtains false Social Status Certification, certifying that the person belongs to these sections of populations; and to provide for punishment for issuing and obtaining false Social Status Certification; and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” 7. Section 2 (c) of the Act of 2013 defines “District Level Certificates Verification Committee”, which is extracted below :- “2(c) "District Level Certificates Verification Committee" means the Committee constituted in a district under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of this Act, for the verification of Social Status Certificate issued to any person;” 8. Section 2 (c) of the Act of 2013 defines “District Level Certificates Verification Committee”, which is extracted below :- “2(c) "District Level Certificates Verification Committee" means the Committee constituted in a district under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of this Act, for the verification of Social Status Certificate issued to any person;” 8. Section 2 (f) defines “High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, which as under :- “2(f) "High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee" means the Committee or Committees constituted under sub-section (1) of Section 7, for conducting enquiry into a social status certificate which is referred by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee or the State Government or any other authority for conducting enquiry, where such certificate is alleged to be wrongfully or fraudulently obtained;” 9. Section 6 of the Act of 2013 talks of District Level Certificates Verification Committee and its powers. Relevant portion of Section 6 of the Act of 2013 is extracted below for ready reference :- “6. District Level Certificates verification Committee and its powers. - (1) There shall be a District Level Certificates Verification Committee with such composition as may be prescribed for verification of Social Status Certificate issued by the Competent Authority under Section 4, as may be notified by the State Government having jurisdiction over one or more districts. (2) A district Level Certificates Verification Committee shall on its own motion or on receipt of any information or reference made to it, in regard to Social Status Certificate(s) issued by the competent Authority, verify such Certificate(s) in the manner as may be prescribed : Provided that the reference made to the District Level Certificates Verification Committee by an employer, an Educational Institution, a Local Authority, the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, for verification of Social Status Certificate(s), shall be in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, and it shall be the duty of the District Certificates Verification Committee or report its findings to the employer, the Educational Institution, the Local Authority, the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the reference. (3) Where there is prima-facie reason to believe that the Social Status Certificate(s) have been wrongfully or fraudulently obtained, the District Level Certificates Verification Committee shall refer all information and relevant documents along with record of its findings to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee : Provided that where the District Level Certificates Verification Committee arrives at an adverse finding, it shall not refer the case to High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee unless a reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to the person, whose Social Status Certificate is disputed. (4) The District Level Certificates Verification Committee shall follow such procedure for verification of Social Status Certificates and adhere to such time limit for reference to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee under sub-section (3) of this Section, as may be prescribed.” 10. Section 7 of the Act of 2013 talks of High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. The relevant portion of Section 7 is extracted below :- “7. High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. -(1) The State Government shall constitute, by notification in the Official Gazette, one or more High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee or Committees, for conducting enquiry into Social Status Certificate(s) referred to it by District Level Certificates Verification Committee under Section 6 or by the State Government, and it shall be the duty of the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee to examine the report of the District Level Certificates Verification Committee and to proceed in this matter as prescribed under Chapter IV of this Act.” 11. Under the Act of 2013, Rule known as Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Class (Regulations of Social Status Certification) Rules, 2013 (Hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 2013” is framed. 12. Rule 2 (o) of the Rules of 2013 defines “Scrutiny Committee” and Rule 2 (q) defines “Verification Committee”. Rule 14 deals with Constitution of District Level Certificates Verification Committee which is constituted by six members. Relevant portion of the rules is extracted below :- “14. Constitution of District Level Certificates Verification Committee. 12. Rule 2 (o) of the Rules of 2013 defines “Scrutiny Committee” and Rule 2 (q) defines “Verification Committee”. Rule 14 deals with Constitution of District Level Certificates Verification Committee which is constituted by six members. Relevant portion of the rules is extracted below :- “14. Constitution of District Level Certificates Verification Committee. - (1) The State Government shall constitute District Level Certificates Verification Committee having jurisdiction over one or more districts, for the verification of certificates issued by the Competent Authority, as under: - (a) Additional Collector or Deputy Collector posted at District Headquarters, nominated by Collector; - Chairman (b) One Officer not below the rank of Class II, belonging to Scheduled Tribe, nominated by Collector; - Member (c) One Officer not below the rank of Class II, belonging to Scheduled Caste, nominated by Collector; - Member (d) One Officer not below the rank of Class II, belonging to Other Backward Class, nominated by Collector; - Member (e) A subject expert officer or Class III executive employee, nominated by Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute; - Member (f) Assistant Commissioner, Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste Development Department. - Member-Secretary” 13. From the aforementioned provisions extracted above, it would reveal as to the mechanism provided under the Act of 2013 to protect the interest of persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of citizens in the State. Under the Act of 2013, the different authorities have been prescribed to be the competent authority for issuance of social status certificate, the District Level Certificates Verification Committee and High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. The field of the Verification Committee constituted under Section 6 is different than that of High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 7. 14. The statute gives powers to the District Level Verification Committee to verify the caste certificate issued by the competent authority on its own motion or upon receiving information. In the case at hand from the contents of letter itself it is clear that some information was received in the form of complaint by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee that petitioners based on the forged caste certificates have obtained government job. In the case at hand from the contents of letter itself it is clear that some information was received in the form of complaint by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee that petitioners based on the forged caste certificates have obtained government job. Respondent No.3 being the Member-Secretary of the Committee constituted under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 clearly mentioned as to why the letter is being issued and asked them to submit documentary proof of their caste. The exercise done by respondent No.3 is in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 and issuance of letter is within its jurisdiction. 15. Submission of learned counsel for petitioners that verification and scrutiny of the certificate possessed by petitioners can be done only by High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee in the scheme of Act of 2013 is misplaced. From the heading of the two provisions itself it is clear that the work of the Committee constituted under Section 6 is to verify the certificate and the Committee constituted under Section 7 is to scrutinize the matter referred to it by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee constituted under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 or by the State Government. The letter Annexure P-1 which is under challenge is the letter issued by the Member-Secretary of Committee constituted in exercise of powers under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 which is primary step of verification. The role of the Committee constituted under Section 7 of the Act of 2013 is only after reference to be made, if any, by the Committee constituted under Section 6. In the facts of the case the reference of the matter to the Committee constituted under Section 7 is only after the Committee under Section 6 is having prima-facie reason to believe that social status certificates have been wrongly and fraudulently obtained. 16. The circular dated 24.09.2013 relied upon by petitioner is issued after coming into force of the Act of 2013 and the guidelines/instruction was issued with an object to provide convenience and additional arrangement with an object to understand the procedure. It is the provisions of the Act and the rules framed there under which will prevail. 16. The circular dated 24.09.2013 relied upon by petitioner is issued after coming into force of the Act of 2013 and the guidelines/instruction was issued with an object to provide convenience and additional arrangement with an object to understand the procedure. It is the provisions of the Act and the rules framed there under which will prevail. The Clause -5 which is referred by counsel for petitioners of circular dated 24.09.2013 deals with different situation i.e. remedy against the decision of the authorities considering the application for grant of social status certificate to the aggrieved party and therefore, placing reliance upon the aforementioned circular by the learned counsel for petitioners is also misplaced in the facts of the case. 17. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Madhuri Patil (supra) held that all the State Government shall constitute a Committee and observed thus :- “4. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an Additional Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the concerned department, (II) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and (III) in the case of Scheduled Castes another officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificates. In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificate. In the case of Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities. 5. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims. The Inspector would go to the local place of residence and original place from which the candidate hails and usually resides or in case of migration to the town or city, the place from which he originally hailed from. The vigilance officer should personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He also should examine the school records, birth registration, if any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. The vigilance officer should personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He also should examine the school records, birth registration, if any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have knowledge of the social status of the candidate and then submit a report to the Directorate together with all particulars as envisaged in the proforma, in particular, of the Scheduled Tribes relating to their peculiar anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies etc. by the concerned-castes or tribes or tribal communities etc. 6. The Director concerned, on receipt of the report from the vigilance officer if he found the claim for social status to be "not genuine" or 'doubtful' or spurious or falsely or wrongly claimed, the Director concerned should issue show-cause notice supplying a copy of the report of the vigilance officer to the candidate by a registered post with acknowledgement due or through the head of the concerned educational institution in which the candidate is studying or employed. The notice should indicate that the representation or reply, if any, would be made within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the notice and in no case on request not more than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice. In case, the candidate seeks for an opportunity of hearing and claims an inquiry to be made in that behalf, the Director on receipt of such representation/reply shall convene the committee and the Joint/Additional Secretary as Chairperson who shall give reasonable opportunity to the candidate/parent/guardian to adduce all evidence in support of their claim. A public notice by beat of drum or any other convenient mode may be published in the village or locality and if any person or association opposes such a claim, an opportunity to adduce evidence may be given to him/it. After giving such opportunity either in person or through counsel, the Committee may make such inquiry as it deems expedient and consider the claims vis-a-vis the objections raised by the candidate or opponent and pass an appropriate order with brief reasons in support thereof. 9. After giving such opportunity either in person or through counsel, the Committee may make such inquiry as it deems expedient and consider the claims vis-a-vis the objections raised by the candidate or opponent and pass an appropriate order with brief reasons in support thereof. 9. The inquiry should be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably by day-to-day proceedings within such period not exceeding two months. If after inquiry, the Caste Scrutiny Committee finds the claim to be false or spurious, they should pass an order cancelling the certificate issued and confiscate the same. It should communicate within one month from the date of the conclusion of the proceedings the result of enquiry to the parent/guardian and the applicant.” 18. Under the Act of 2013, the genuineness of the caste certificate issued by the competent authority is to be verified first by the District Level Certificates Verification Committee, who after giving prima-facie reasons to believe that it is obtained wrongfully and fraudulently refers the matter to the Committee constituted under Section 7 and the Committee scrutinize the matter in the manner provided under Rules of 2013. 19. Submission of counsel for petitioner that the Chhattisgarh State Scheduled Tribe Commission given a finding in favour of petitioner, and further Judicial Magistrate in criminal case passed an order of acquittal in case with respect to the caste certificate, therefore, further proceedings of verification of certificate is not permissible is not sustainable in view of above discussions. 20. In the aforementioned facts of the case and the scheme of Act of 2013 in the opinion of this Court, the respondent No.3 has followed due procedure prescribed under the Act of 2013 and the rules framed thereunder. There is no jurisdictional or procedural error on the part of respondent No.3 and therefore, I do not find any merit in this petition according it is dismissed at the motion stage itself.