ORDER : (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J.) 1. By filing WPC No.1944/2019, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.02.2019 passed by High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee, whereby the said Committee has cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner, whereas by filing WPS No.4973/2019, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.05.2019 passed by Divisional Joint Director Agriculture, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (CG), whereby services of the petitioner has been terminated on the basis of order dated 23.02.2019 passed by High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee. Hence, it is very much relevant to hear both the cases analogously, therefore, both the cases are heard and decided by a common order. 2. The petitioner has preferred WPC No. 1944/2019 under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief:- “10.i That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 23.02.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No. 2. 10.ii That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the show cause notice dated 07.05.2019. 10.iii Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.iv. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also, kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice. The petitioner has preferred WPS No. 4973/2019 under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief:- “10.i That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned termination of service of petitioner order dated 27.05.2019 (Annexure-P/1) passed by respondent No.3. 10.ii That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.iii Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.iv Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also, kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice. 3. Facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Gramin Vikas Vistar Adhikari, Mungeli on 07.5.1999 against a post reserved for candidate of Scheduled Caste, on the basis of her Caste Certificate issued on 28.02.1992 by Tahsildar, Bilaspur, Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh). On a complaint received, in respect of her caste, respondent No. 2, High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee initiated proceeding to verify the case certificate of the petitioner. On a complaint received, in respect of her caste, respondent No. 2, High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee initiated proceeding to verify the case certificate of the petitioner. During the course of enquiry, the petitioner produced caste certificate of her father and other relevant documents. However, the High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee has held that the petitioner has failed to produce documents/evidence prior to Presidential notification dated 10.8.1950 in respect of her/her family’s social status/caste as ‘Kori’ scheduled caste in the State of Madhya Pradesh and further held that the Tahsildar, Bilaspur, who issued the caste certificate on 28.02.1992, is not a competent authority to issue the caste certificate, thereby cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner issued by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur (the then Madhya Pradesh) on 28-2-1992. Against the order of cancellation of the caste certificate, the petitioner has filed WPC No.1944/2019, wherein vide Order dated 18.6.2019, this Court has granted interim protection in respect of service of the petitioner. However vide order dated 27.5.2019 respondent No.3/Divisional Joint Director Agriculture, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (CG) has terminated her services, against which the petitioner preferred instant petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner joined on the post of Gramin Krishi Vistar Adhikari on 07.5.1999 in the erstwhile/undivided State of Madhya Pradesh under the category of Scheduled Castes as she belongs to ‘Kori’ community. On account of the Madhya Pradesh State Regorganization Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2000’), the services of the petitioner got allocated to the newly created State of Chhattisgarh. Thus, her appointment since inception was not invalid because at that time, i.e. in the year 1999, ‘Kori community was recognized as Scheduled Caste category under the Presidential notification for the undivided State of Madhya Pradesh. It is further submitted that in the Order dated 26.02.2019 (Annexure-P/2), passed by the High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee, the committee itself stated that ancestors of the petitioner were original resident of Village Badvara, Tahsil Badvara, Distt. Katni (MP) and father of the petitioner Lallu Ram has been issued permanent Caste certificate by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katni on 17.9.2009, wherein his caste has been mentioned as ‘Kori’ Scheduled Caste category. It is further submitted that now the petitioner has filed copy of her permanent caste certificate issued by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Tahsil Mudvara, Distt. Katni (MP) and father of the petitioner Lallu Ram has been issued permanent Caste certificate by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katni on 17.9.2009, wherein his caste has been mentioned as ‘Kori’ Scheduled Caste category. It is further submitted that now the petitioner has filed copy of her permanent caste certificate issued by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Tahsil Mudvara, Distt. Katni, Madhya Pradesh, wherein it has been mentioned that the petitioner belongs to ‘Kori’ caste and the said caste has been recognized as Scheduled Caste in the notification issued for the State of Madhya Pradesh. Therefore, it is prayed that the petition may be allowed and relief may be granted to the petitioner. To substantiate his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner place reliance in the matter of Pankaj Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand [( 2021 (20) SCC 545 ]. 5. Learned counsel for the State/respondent has filed reply stating inter alia that the petitioner is neither original resident of State of Chhattisgarh nor she has filed caste certificate issued by the competent authority in her favour before the High Leval Caste Scrutiny Committee at the time of enquiry. Learned counsel for the State referring to its reply would submit that despite providing various opportunity, the petitioner failed to produce any document like misel or any educational document of her forefathers/father to prove the fact that they belong to ‘Kori’ community prior to issuance of Presidential notification. He would further submit that petitioner is original resident of Village Kumharvara, Tahsil Badvara, Distt. Katni, Madhya Pradesh but she filed her caste certificate issued by Tahsildar Bilaspur on 28-2-1992, whereas the Tahsildar, Bilaspur is not a competent authority to issue caste certificate. He would further submit that in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development & Ors., [ (1994) 6 SCC 241 ], the Apex Court has held that permanent caste certificate should be issued by a competent authority of the concerned place/State where the employee is the original resident and not by the authority where the employee is serving. In instant case, petitioner/her forefathers are not original residents of State of Chhattisgarh, rather, they are original residents of State of Madhya Pradesh. In instant case, petitioner/her forefathers are not original residents of State of Chhattisgarh, rather, they are original residents of State of Madhya Pradesh. Thus, the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee has rightly cancelled her caste certificate and therefore, termination of her service is also in accordance with law, as the petitioner obtained the service in the category of scheduled caste, which she does not belong. Therefore, both the petitions are liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on the records of both the cases. 7. In the instant cases, it is not in dispute that, petitioner was appointed on the post of Gramin Krishi Vistar Adhikari at Mungeli, Distt. Bilaspur at the time of undivided State of Madhya Pradesh in the category of Scheduled Caste vide order dated 7-5-1999 (Annexure P-3). Since then, she was working in the State of Madhya Pradesh. State of ‘Chhattisgarh’ came into existence from appointed day i.e. 1-11-2000 vide Madhya Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘Act of 2000’). Thus, she is working on aforesaid post in Chhattisgarh prior to reorganization of State of Madhya Pradesh. It is also not in dispute and is evident also from the order dated 23-2-2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and certificate dated 30-12-2013 issued by the Dy. Director, Agriculture, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) that, after bifurcation of State of Madhya Pradesh, her service was allocated to the newly created State of ‘Chhattisgarh’. 8. Vide order dated 23-2-2019 (Annexure P-2), the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner issued by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur on 28-2-1992 holding therein that, forefathers of the petitioner were originally the resident of village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni, Madhya Pradesh and not of State of Chhattisgarh, therefore, the Tahsildar, Bilaspur is not competent authority to issue caste certificate to petitioner under Chhattisgarh Anusuchit Jati, Anusuchit Janjati avm Anya Pichhada Varg (Samajik Prasthiti ke Pramanikaran ka Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2013 and the petitioner has also failed to adduce any evidence / document to prove the fact that, prior to issuance of Presidential notification dated 10-8-1950, she/her forefathers belong to ‘Kori’ scheduled caste community. It has further been observed that in the Act of 2000, Kori community has been notified as Scheduled Caste for the State of Chhattisgarh also, but, since petitioner’s forefathers were not original residents of State of Chhattisgarh, therefore, the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee vide order dated 23-2-2019 (Annexure P-2) has cancelled the caste certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur on 28-2-1992 in favour of the petitioner. Based on aforesaid order , services of petitioner have been terminated by respondent No. 3 vide order dated 27-5-2019. 9. Based on the report of the Vigilance Cell and other documents submitted by the petitioner, the conclusions arrived at by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee in its order dated 23-2-2019 (Annexure P-2 ) are as under :- 10. Thus, as per aforesaid order of the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee itself, Lalluram Verma, father of petitioner, was born on 7-7-1945 at village Kumharwara, Tahsil Badwara, distt. Katni (MP) and he obtained his school education in village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni (MP), which is evident from Dakhil Kharij register of the school. Forefathers of the petitioner were originally the residents of aforesaid village Badwara and Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Katni, Distt. Katni (MP) has issued permanent caste certificate vide Case No. 9517/B./121/2008-09 dated 17-9-2009 in favour of Lalluram Verma son of Bhaluram Verma, wherein his caste has been shown ‘Kori’ scheduled caste. It is also evident from the report of High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee that, in favour of petitioner, the Tehsildar, Bilaspur while undivided State of Madhya Pradesh had issued caste certificate dated 28-2-1992 showing her caste ‘Kori’ scheduled caste community. As such, as per aforesaid report itself, not only petitioner’s forefathers were original residents of village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni, Madhya Pradesh, rather father of petitioner born and brought up at village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni, Madhya Pradesh and he also got his initial education up-til middle school, at Middle School, Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni (MP), therefore, the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katni, Distt. Katni has issued permanent caste certificate in favour of father of petitioner namely Lalluram Verma, in which his caste is shown as ‘Kori’ scheduled caste. Since father of the petitioner was residing at Bilaspur as he was posted there, therefore, petitioner got her all education from Bilaspur (CG). 11. Katni (MP), therefore, the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katni, Distt. Katni has issued permanent caste certificate in favour of father of petitioner namely Lalluram Verma, in which his caste is shown as ‘Kori’ scheduled caste. Since father of the petitioner was residing at Bilaspur as he was posted there, therefore, petitioner got her all education from Bilaspur (CG). 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Pankaj Kumar v. State of Jharkhand (supra), while considering alike issue in the light of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, has observed in para 30 and 31 as under :- “30. To identify that the person is a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, it may be imperative for him to justify and establish that he is a member of that caste/tribe who has been a sufferer of disadvantages or social hardships or economic sufferings to which the members of the castes/tribes were subjected to and is identified in the Presidential Notification of 1950 and the caste certificate issuance authority has to take into consideration the place of origin/domicile and resident of the State to conduct a discreet enquiry or inquiry contemplated under the scheme of rules for the purpose of recording a finding as to whether the incumbent who claimed to be a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or OBC, as the case may be, is eligible and entitled for issuance of the caste certificate as has been claimed by him and once a certificate is issued to him, he becomes a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Class, as the case may be, and his wards also at a later stage became entitled to seek privileges and benefits flowing thereof throughout the State which are admissible under the law. 31. At the same time, such of the castes/tribes which are region based, the incumbent has to furnish in the first instance the place of origin/domicile of that particular region where the caste/tribe has been identified as Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe to make him entitled to claim reservation of SC/ST, as the case may be, and after the caste certificate is issued to the incumbent, his wards also became entitled to claim the privileges and benefits of the reservation admissible under the law throughout the State.” 12. Having considered aforesaid law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, if facts of instant case, as reflected from the record and from Annexure P-2, are seen, it is apparent that, since forefathers and father of petitioner were originally residents of village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni (MP) and permanent caste certificate has been issued by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue ), Katni (MP) in favour of father of petitioner, therefore, petitioner is also entitled to seek privileges and benefits thereof. Further since, appointment of petitioner on the post of Gramin Krishi Vistar Adhikari was made in the category of scheduled caste at the time of undivided State of Madhya Pradesh, when ‘Kori’ community was in the category of scheduled caste in the State of Madhya Pradesh, therefore, after formation of State of Chhattisgarh, the petitioner cannot be deprived from her right flowing through her father in respect of her caste i.e. ‘Kori’ scheduled caste community. 13. Further, service conditions of such employees, who were in the employment in the undivided State of Madhya Pradesh and after bifurcation of State of ‘Madhya Pradesh’, have been allocated to the newly created State of ‘Chhattisgarh’, have been protected under Sections 68, 69 and 70 of Chapter 8 of the Act of 2000, which reads thus :- “68. Provisions relating to services in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.- (1) Every person who immediately before the appointed day is serving in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Madhya Pradesh shall, on and from that day provisionally continue to serve in connection with the affairs of the State of Madhya Pradesh unless he is required, by general or special order of the Central Government to serve provisionally in connection with the affairs of the State of Chhattisgarh: Provided that no direction shall be issued under this section after the expiry of a period of one year from the appointed day. (2) As soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government shall, by general or special order, determine the successor State to which every person referred to in sub-section (1) shall be finally allotted for service and the date with effect from which such allotment shall take effect or be deemed to have taken effect. (2) As soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government shall, by general or special order, determine the successor State to which every person referred to in sub-section (1) shall be finally allotted for service and the date with effect from which such allotment shall take effect or be deemed to have taken effect. (3) Every person who is finally allotted under the provisions of sub-section (2) to a successor State shall, if he is not already serving therein be made available for serving in the successor State from such date as may be agreed upon between the Governments concerned or in default of such agreement, as may be determined by the Central Government. 69. Provisions relating to other services.- (1) Nothing in this section or section 68 shall be deemed to affect on or after the appointed day the operation of the provisions of Chapter I of Part XIV of the Constitution in relation to determination of the conditions of service of persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Union or any State: Provided that the conditions of service applicable immediately before the appointed day in the case of any person deemed to have been allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh or to the State of Chhattisgarh under section 68 shall not be varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. (2) All services prior to the appointed day rendered by a person- (a) if he is deemed to have been allocated to any State under section 68, shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of that State; (b) if he is deemed to have been allocated to the Union in connection with the administration of the Chhattisgarh shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of the Union, for the purposes of the rules regulating his conditions of service. (3) The provisions of section 68, shall not apply in relation to members of any All-India Service. 70. (3) The provisions of section 68, shall not apply in relation to members of any All-India Service. 70. Provisions as to continuance of officers in same post.- (1) Every person who, immediately before the appointed day is holding or discharging duties of any post or office in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Madhya Pradesh in any area which on that day falls within any of the successor States shall continue to hold the same post or office in that successor State, and shall be deemed, on and from that day, to have been duly appointed to the post or office by the Government of, or any other appropriate authority in, that successor State: Provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a competent authority, on and from the appointed day, from passing in relation to such person any order affecting the continuance in such post or office.” 14. In the case of Pankaj Kumar (supra), Hon’ble Supreme Court while considering alike issue and similar provisions of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 and various judgments of Apex Court, has observed in para 49 as under :- “49. The scheme of the 2000 Act postulates that employees who are working immediately on or before the appointed date, in the State of Bihar, has either domicile of the districts that formed part of State of Jharkhand under Section 3 of the Act or opted or joined being junior in their respective seniority, stands absorbed in the successor State of Jharkhand and by virtue of a statutory instrument, their service conditions stand protected and became entitled to claim privileges and benefits to which the members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/OBC are entitled for in terms of the Presidential Order, 1950 as amended from time to time.” 15. Having considered aforesaid provisions of Sections 68, 69 and 70 of the Act of 2000 and the ruling of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pankaj Kumar’s case (supra), it is evidently clear that, after reorganization of State of Madhya Pradesh and creation of new State of Chhattisgarh, service conditions of the employees, who have been allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh or State of Chhattisgarh under Section 68 of the Act of 2000, shall not be varied to their disadvantages except with the previous approval of the Central Government. 16. 16. In instant case, since appointment of petitioner was made in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in the category of scheduled caste, as her forefathers were originally resident of village Badwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni (MP), where ‘Kori’ community was recognized as ‘scheduled caste’ community under the Presidential notification and her father Lalluram Verma has also been issued permanent caste certificate of ‘Kori’ scheduled caste by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katni (MP) and after bifurcation of the State of Madhya Pradesh and creation of new State of Chhattisgarh, service of petitioner was allocated in the State of Chhattisgarh, therefore, her service conditions were protected under Sections 69 and 70 of the MP Reorganization Act, 2000. 17. Although, as per order Annexure P-2, petitioner had not submitted her caste certificate issued by competent authority of her native place i.e. Katni (MP), rather she had submitted her caste certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur on 28-2-1992 showing her caste ‘Kori’ scheduled caste, but she has filed her caste certificate (photocopy) dated 1-7-2019 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Tahsil Mudwara, Distt. Katni (MP) through covering memo dated 9-5-2024 before this Court, wherein it has been mentioned that she is originally resident of Kumharwara, Tahsil Badwara, Distt. Katni (MP) and her caste is ‘Kori’ scheduled caste. Although, this document was not filed before the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, but as has been observed in preceding paragraph that, original caste certificate (permanent) of her father Lalluram Verma son of Bhaluram Verma was filed before the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, wherein his caste was shown as ‘Kori’ scheduled caste and as has been observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Kumar (supra) that, once a certificate of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe or other backward classes, as the case may be, is issued to a person, he becomes a member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe or other backward classes, as the case may be and his wards also at a later stage, became entitled to seek privileges and benefits flowing thereof throughout the State, which are admissible under the law. Therefore, only because petitioner did not file her caste certificate issued by competent authority of her native place i.e. Katni (MP), she cannot be deprived from her caste i.e. ‘Kori’ scheduled caste flowing through her father and further protection given to her service conditions under Sections 68 and 69 of the Act of 2000. 18. In view of above discussion, order dated 23-2-2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee is set aside/quashed. 19. Resultantly, the order dated 27-5-2019 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondent No. 3, whereby employment of petitioner has been terminated, is also set aside/quashed with consequences to follow. 20. Accordingly, WPC No. 1944/2019 and WPS No. 4973/2019 are allowed.