Order : (Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.) 1. By the instant petition, the petitioner has questioned legality and correctness of the impugned order dated 3.9.2014 (Annexure P1) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Kusmi, District Balrampur–Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh) by which the SDO (R) has cancelled the permanent caste certificate belonging to the petitioner in respect of “Gond” caste, a Scheduled Tribe in the Presidential List recognised by the State of Chhattisgarh in the list of Scheduled Tribes at Sl.No.16. 2. In the petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding the respondent State for calling the entire records related with the subject matter of the writ petition specially about the order Annexure P/1. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding high level enquiry in the issue raised by the petitioner by way of the order Annexure P/1. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding to quash the order Annexure P/1 as bad in law. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding complete investigation even against the petitioner regarding his caste certificate so that the truth may be placed before this Hon'ble Court. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding to take appropriate action against him if his certificate is found to be obtained by playing fraud or cheating. 10.6 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding cost of the petition may also be awarded. 10.7 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding for initiate appropriate legal action for malafide action of the respondent No. 5. 10.7 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding for initiate appropriate legal action for malafide action of the respondent No. 5. 10.8 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding registration of the FIR and investigation for illegal cancellation of the valid caste certificate of the petitioner. 10.9 Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 3. According to the petitioner, he belongs to Scheduled Tribe, i.e., “Gond” caste and he is a resident of State of Chhattisgarh. His forefathers were resident of Village Kendai, at present District Korba and his maternal uncles belonged to Shankargarh, District Balrampur–Ramanujgang. The petitioner was born and brought up in Village Shankargarh in the house of his maternal uncles. As such, he applied for a caste certificate showing his residence to be Shankargarh, the residence of his maternal uncles and accordingly he was granted a caste certificate of Gond caste on the basis of documents filed by him. Subsequently, a complaint was made by one Yagyavalkya Mishra as he was having grudge with the petitioner. Upon such complaint, the SDO (R), Kusmi has sought permission from the Collector for review of his order and after obtaining permission from the Collector, Balrampur, he has reviewed his earlier order and has cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner, which is impugned herein. 4. Shri S.C. Verma, learned Senior Advocate along with Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate appearing for the petitioner would argue that the SDO (R) is not competent to cancel the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner under review jurisdiction because he is not authorised or having jurisdiction to cancel any caste certificate. It is the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, who, after following due procedure of law, can cancel caste certificate as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development , AIR 1995 SC 94 . It is the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, who, after following due procedure of law, can cancel caste certificate as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development , AIR 1995 SC 94 . For cancellation of a caste certificate, in the said judgment, the Supreme Court has given certain directions which have to be followed and only after being exhaustive scrutiny the caste certificate can be cancelled by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The SDO (R) does not have any power or authority to cancel the caste certificate issued in favour of any person. 5. On the other hand, Shri Ritesh Giri, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents 1 to 4, has submitted that the SDO (R) has rightly passed the impugned order. He has reviewed his order by which he has issued caste certificate in favour of the petitioner only on the basis of his being a resident of Shankargarh, whereas Shankargarh is not the residence of the petitioner, it is the residence of his maternal uncles. Since the SDO (R) has passed the impugned order after due permission of the Collector to review his order, he has rightly passed the order while cancelling the caste certificate of the petitioner by the impugned order which in accordance with law and it has been passed following the due procedure of law. 6. Shri S.S. Marhas, learned counsel appearing for the intervenor/complainant has opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner and has specifically submitted that the SDO (R) has rightly passed the impugned order while cancelling the caste certificate of the petitioner. The petitioner has obtained his caste certificate showing him to be a resident of Shankargarh, which, in fact, is the residence of his maternal uncles. Upon the compliant made by the intervenor/complainant, it was inquired into and the caste certificate was rightly cancelled. As such, there is no merit in the instant petition. 7. I have heard the rival contentions put-forth on behalf of the parties and perused the material available with due care. 8. Upon the compliant made by the intervenor/complainant, it was inquired into and the caste certificate was rightly cancelled. As such, there is no merit in the instant petition. 7. I have heard the rival contentions put-forth on behalf of the parties and perused the material available with due care. 8. The first and foremost question for consideration before this Court is that whether the SDO (R), Shankargarh has power and authority as also jurisdiction to cancel the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner for “Gond” caste, a Scheduled Tribe in the Presidential List and listed at Sl.No.16 in the list of Scheduled Tribes for the State of Chhattisgarh. The SDO (R), after due verification, has issued the caste certificate in favour of the petitioner and upon the complaint made by the intervenor/complainant, he has obtained an order for review of his order and has cancelled the caste certificate. By doing so, the SDO (R) has lost his sight that he does not have power and jurisdiction to cancel the caste certificate and for that there is authority under the law who can cancel the caste certificate after following due procedure as envisaged in Kumari Madhuri Patil case (supra). The Supreme Court, while considering the various aspects in respect of caste of any particular person, has particularly held the procedure by which caste of any person can be verified by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Vide paragraph 12 of its judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: “12. The admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained on the basis of false social status certificate necessarily have the effect of depriving the genuine Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or OBC candidates as enjoined in the Constitution of the benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. The genuine candidates are also denied admission to educational institutions or appointments to office or posts under a State for want of social status certificate. The ineligible or spurious persons who falsely gained entry resort to dilatory tactics and create hurdles in completion of the inquiries by the Scrutiny Committee. It is true that the applications for admission to educational institutions are generally made by a parent, since on that date many a time the student may be a minor. It is the parent or the guardian who may play fraud claiming false status certificate. It is true that the applications for admission to educational institutions are generally made by a parent, since on that date many a time the student may be a minor. It is the parent or the guardian who may play fraud claiming false status certificate. It is, therefore, necessary that the certificates issued are scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost expedition and promptitude. For that purpose, it is necessary to streamline the procedure for the issuance of a social status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval, which may be the following: 1. The application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue-Sub-Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such Officer rather than at the Officer, Taluk or Mandal Level. 2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community, parts of groups of tribes or tribal communities, the place from which he originally hails from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the concerned Directorate. 3. Application for verification of the caste certificate by the Scrutiny Committee shall be filed at least six months in advance before seeking admission into educational institution or an appointment to a post. 4. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an Additional or 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, 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 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 overall 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 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. 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 ?? 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 acknowledgment 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/Addl. 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. 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. 7.In case the report is in favour of the candidate and found to be genuine and true, no further action need be taken except where the report or the particulars given are procured or found to be false or fraudulently obtained and in the latter event the same procedure as is envisaged in para 6 be followed. 8. Notice contemplated in para 6 should be issued to the parents/guardian also in case candidate is minor to appear before the Committee with all evidence in his or their support of the claim for the social status certificates. 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 parent/guardian and the applicant. 10. In case of any delay in finalising the proceedings, and in the meanwhile the last date for admission into an educational institution or appointment to an officer post, is getting expired, the candidate be admitted by the Principal or such other authority competent in that behalf or appointed on the basis of the social status certificate already issued or an affidavit duly sworn by the parent/guardian/candidate before the competent officer or non-official and such admission or appointment should be only provisional, subject to the result of the inquiry by the Scrutiny Committee. 11. The order passed by the Committee shall be final and conclusive only subject to the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. 12. 11. The order passed by the Committee shall be final and conclusive only subject to the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. 12. No suit or other proceedings before any other authority should lie. 13. The High Court would dispose of these cases as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months. In case, as per its procedure, the writ petition/Miscellaneous petition/matter is disposed of by a single Judge, then no further appeal would lie against that order to the Division Bench but subject to special leave under Article 136. 14. In case, the certificate obtained or social status claimed is found to be false, the parent/guardian/the candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim. If the prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence of the accused, it could be regarded as an offence involving moral turpitude, disqualification for elective posts or offices under the State or the Union of elections to any local body, legislature or the Parliament. 15. As soon as the finding is recorded by the Scrutiny Committee holding that the certificate obtained was false, on its cancellation and confiscation simultaneously, it should be communicated to the concerned educational institution or the appointing authority by registered post with acknowledgment due with a request to cancel the admission or the appointment. The Principal etc. of the educational institution responsible for making the admission or the appointing authority should cancel the admission appointment without any further notice to the candidate and debar the candidate for further study or continue in office in a post." 9. In the State of Chhattisgarh also, an act has been enacted which is called as the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (henceforth ‘the Act of 2013’) in which specific provisions are made for verification of caste of a Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes. The relevant Act applicable in this case is quoted below: 3. Application for issuance of Social Status Certificate.- Any person belonging to Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Class may apply to the Competent Authority for issuance of a Social Status Certificate in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed. 4. The relevant Act applicable in this case is quoted below: 3. Application for issuance of Social Status Certificate.- Any person belonging to Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Class may apply to the Competent Authority for issuance of a Social Status Certificate in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed. 4. Procedure for Issuance of Social Status Certificate.- (1) The Competent Authority, may on receipt of an application under Section 3 and after making such inquiry as may be prescribed issue a Social Status Certificate: Provided that where the competent authority comes to a conclusion that there are sufficient reasons for rejecting the application for such certificate, it shall record the reasons of rejection in writing and inform the applicant accordingly. (2) A Social Status Certificate issued by the Competent Authority under sub section (1) of this Section, shall be a document of permanent nature, the validity of which shall not be limited by time: Provided that duplicate copy of the Social Status Certificate may be issued by competent authority only when the applicant declares the loss of the original certificate. (3) Social Status Certification issued by an person, officer or authority other than the Competent Authority shall not be accepted for the purpose of any public employment, admission to an educational institution or for availing any benefit accruing to the Scheduled Castes or a Scheduled Tribes or Other Backward Classes. 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. 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 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 document 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. 7. (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. 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. (2) The High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed : Provided that where the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee decides to arrive at an adverse finding, it shall not do so unless a reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to the person whose Social Status Certificate is disputed. 8. Cancellation and confiscation of false Social Status Certificate. (1) If after enquiry under Section 7 of this Act, High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee is of the opinion that, the social status certificate was obtained wrongfully or fraudulently, it shall, by an order in writing, cancel and confiscate the certificate by following such procedure as may be prescribed. (2) The order passed by the High Power Certificate Scrutiny Committee under this Act, shall be final and conclusive subject to the proceedings under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India only. 10. Now, coming to the present case, the first and foremost question is whether the SDO (R) has committed a jurisdictional error by which he has cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner, which is not within his domain as for that under the law, the Caste Scrutiny Committee has to verify and decide the caste of any person, while conducting a complete inquiry as determined by the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil case (supra), only on the basis that one person has shown his place of residence at some place which is not his original or native place, it cannot be held that he does not belong to any particular caste. For determination of his caste, the Caste Scrutiny Committee is required to verify the caste of a person from his original place where his forefathers were residing. In the instant case, so far as the SDO (R) is concerned, if any complaint is received, the only action that could be taken by the SDO (R) was to refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee and to direct the petitioner to get it verified from the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The SDO (R) cannot himself cancel a caste certificate of any person if it had been issued by any person or authority at any point of time. 11. Even if any complaint has been received in respect of caste of any person under the Act of 2013 it would be obligatory upon the concerned authority to comply Sections 6 and 7 of the Act of 2013 and the verification of the Social Status/Caste would be upon the District Level Caste Verification Committee and thereafter by the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee which after due enquiry and after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the person whose social status certificate is disputed and to pass order after due verification of the caste of any person. The first and foremost thing in this enquiry is to grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the person concerned and if any, reasonable opportunity has not been granted to the person concerned, the enquiry would be meaningless and in such circumstance there would be no hesitation in quashing/setting aside the orders passed either by the competent authority or the Caste Scrutiny Committee as stated above. In the present matter, the SDO (R) without having any authority of law has cancelled the caste certificate in an erroneous manner and that too without having jurisdiction and authority to do so. The petitioner was also not granted any opportunity of hearing before cancelling his caste certificate. As such, keeping in view of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) and further considering the Act of 2013, I hereby quash the impugned order passed by the SDO (R), Kusmi, however, the respondent authorities are at liberty to enquire the caste of the petitioner as per directions given in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) as well as in compliance with the Act of 2013. 12. 12. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid directions.