Allahabad High Court
Smt. Kiran Gond vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 6 October, 2023
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Prashant Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193014-DB
Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34296 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Kiran Gond
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nikhil Kumar,Prashant Kanha
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Present writ petition is preferred assailing the validity of notice dated 25.02.2023 and order dated 01.12.2015 passed by Tehsildar, Sadar, Azamgarh-third respondent, whereby, the caste certificate of the petitioner has been cancelled and petitioner was asked to surrender her caste certificate. Further it is prayed to command the respondents not to give effect to the aforesaid notice/order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner informs to the Court that in similar circumstances, this Court vide order dated 30.10.2015 in Writ C No.60682 of 2015 (Smt. Radha Devi vs. State of UP and others) has allowed the writ petition to certain extent. For ready reference, the order dated 30.10.2015 is extracted as under:-
"The petitioner has sought the quashing of the order dated 30 September 2015 passed by the Tehsildar, Rajatalab, Varanasi, by which the caste certificate issued to the petitioner has been cancelled.
It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Authority which granted the caste certificate does not have the jurisdiction to cancel the caste certificate as the jurisdiction solely vests with the District Level Committee in view of the provisions contained in the Government Order dated 27 January 2011. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Rajesh Kumar Gond v. State of U.P. and Others.
Learned Standing Counsel appears for all the respondents.
The Division Bench in Rajesh Kumar Gond placed reliance upon an earlier Division Bench judgment of this Court in Hizwana Bano v. State of U.P. and Others2. It would be useful to reproduce the observations made by the Division Bench in the case of Hizwana Bano and the same are as follows:-
"When a complainant contends that a caste certificate was wrongly issued or obtained by suppressing facts or the like, then in that event, it would be open to the complainant, even if the complainant is a stranger as long as his rights are affected, to move the Caste Scrutiny Committee, to verify the caste certificate by setting out the reasons and objections as to why the caste certificate should not be verified. Para 3 of the Government Order would show that verification is not only with regard to admission in any educational institution or appointment in any service but also for other reasons. Therefore, whenever a person seeks to rely on a caste certificate for claiming any benefits, he would be entitled to, then in that event, if a complainant intervenes to oppose the verification of such caste certificate or independently applies before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the procedure for verification shall be followed and necessary orders shall be passed by the Committee after following due procedure.
If the issue is now considered in the light of the above discussions, it would be clear that the respondent No. 2 would cease to have jurisdiction, once the caste certificate was issued. The Tehsildar in these circumstances would have no authority to recall or cancel the same, except may be in a case of fraud. Respondent No. 2, however, would have the power to correct clerical or artificial mistakes. The jurisdiction to verify the caste certificate and whether it should be validated or invalidated is of the Caste Scrutiny Committee."
Following the aforesaid Division Bench judgment, it was observed in Rajesh Kumar Gond that the jurisdiction to verify the caste certificate and whether it should be valid or invalid, has to be scrutinized by the Caste Scrutiny Committee and the authority which has issued the caste certificate would, therefore, have no jurisdiction to cancel the same except when it has been obtained by playing fraud or concealing relevant facts. In the present case, no finding has been recorded that the caste certificate had been obtained by playing fraud or by concealing material facts.
In this view of the matter, the order dated 30 September 2015 passed by the Tehsildar, Rajatalab is set aside. It would, however, be open to the respondents to get the caste certificate of the petitioner verified by the District Level Committee in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
The petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above."
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the present matter is also squarely covered with the aforesaid matter and as such similar treatment may also be extended to the petitioner.
So far as the factual and legal aspect is concerned, moreover the same is accepted by counsel for the respondents.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, following the same set of reasoning, the writ petition is allowed. The notice dated 25.02.2023 and order dated 01.12.2015 are set aside. It would, however, be open to the respondent to get the caste certificate of the petitioner verified by the District Level Committee in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
Order Date :- 6.10.2023
A. Pandey
