Annaji Maroti Raut vs Scheduled Caste, Scheduled ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 1307 Bom

JUDGMENT

A. P. Shah J.

1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 31-10-2002 passed by the respondent No. 1 - Caste Scrutiny Committee whereby the caste certificate of the petitioner certifying that the petitioner belongs to Nomadic Tribe (Otari) has been declared as invalid. The petitioner is a Councillor of Nagpur Municipal Corporation and is presently holding the post of Dy Mayor. The petitioner had contested election for the post of Councillor from the constituency reserved for the Nomadic Tribes. The petitioner had filed his nomination form for the said constituency along with the caste certificate dated 3-7-1997 issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Dy. Collector of Nagpur. The petitioner was declared elected as Councillor from the said constituency and thereafter he was elected as Dy Mayor. It appears that the 3rd respondent filed complaints before the Divisional Social Welfare Officer & Caste Verification Officer, Nagpur Division Nagpur as well as Chief Election Officer Nagpur Municipal Corporation alleging that the petitioner, on the basis of a bogus and fabricated caste certificate, contested the election from the constituency reserved for candidates belonging to Nomadic Tribe, and got elected. It appears that an enquiry was conducted by the District Magistrate Nagpur and report of enquiry dated 11-8-2002 was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner on being noticed appeared before the Scrutiny Committee and filed his written statement. Along with the written statement the petitioner produced documentary evidence in support of his caste claim. The petitioner specifically made a grievance that the enquiry was conducted by the District Magistrate behind his back and without any notice to him. He challenged the jurisdiction of the Caste Scrutiny Committee to enquire into the genuineness of the caste certificate. He contended that he belongs to Nomadic Tribe (Otari) and in support of his case claim he relied upon various documents including school leaving certificates of his father, uncle, aunt, grand father as also his own birth certificate. The Scrutiny Committee, however, declined to consider various contentions raised by the petitioner and solely on the basis of the report received from the District Magistrate proceeded to declare that the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner is invalid.

3. Mr. S.V. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contended that the impugned order is passed in excess of jurisdiction vested upon the Scrutiny Committee. The learned counsel urged that the Scrutiny Committee has been constituted in order to verify the claim of the candidates which are referred to it to ascertain whether the claim of the candidate who either belongs to Scheduled Caste or Schedule Tribe is valid or not. However, the Scrutiny Committee has no jurisdiction either to go into the existence of the certificate which is referred to it or conduct enquiry in order to find out whether such certificate is allegedly forged or bogus. In the alternative he submitted that assuming that the Scrutiny Committee has jurisdiction to investigate into the question of genuineness of the caste certificate, the Committee ought to have conducted independent inquiry and afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to establish that the certificate is genuine. He submitted that enquiry was conducted by the District Magistrate without knowledge of the petitioner and the report was submitted, of which copy was supplied to the petitioner only during the proceedings before the Scrutiny Committee. He therefore submitted that there was total violation of principles of natural justice. In any event according to Mr. Manohar the Scrutiny Committee was obliged to conduct inquiry in relation to the claim of the petitioner that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe (Otari). The method and procedure adopted by the Committee is contrary to the well settled principles of law and contrary to the directions given by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and Anr., v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors., ,

4. In the light of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner the first question which falls for our consideration is whether the Scrutiny Committee has jurisdiction to enquire as to whether the caste certificate issued to the petitioner is allegedly forged or bogus. The Scrutiny Committee is constituted under the provisions of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of issuance and Verification) Caste Certificate Act, 2000, which is hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'. The said Act was brought into force with effect from 23-5-2001. As can be seen from the preamble of the Act, the Act is enacted with a view to regulate issuance and verification of the caste certificates to the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and Special Backward Category and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Under Section 3 of the said Act any person belonging to such Castes, Tribes or Classes, is required to produce caste certificate, in order to claim the benefit of any reservation provided to such Castes, Tribes or Classes either in any public employment or for admission into any educational institution, or any other benefit under any special provisions made under Clause (4) of Article 15 of the Constitution of India or for the purpose of contesting for elective post in any local authority or in the Cooperative Societies, or for purchase or transfer of land from a tribal land holder or any other purposes specified by the Government, in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed to the Competent Authority for the issue of a caste certificate. Section 4 provides for the grant of caste certificate by the competent authority and Sub-section (2) thereof provides that the caste certificate issued by the competent authority shall be valid only subject to the verification and grant of validity certificate by the Scrutiny Committee, Section 6 provides for constitution of one or more Caste Scrutiny Committee(s) for verification of caste certificate issued by the competent authority under Sub-section (1) of section 4. The Scrutiny Committee is required to follow such procedure for verification of the caste certificate and adhere to the time limit for verification and grant of validity certificate as prescribed.

5. Section 7 of the said Act provides for confiscation and cancellation of false caste certificate. Section 7 reads thus:

"7. Confiscation and cancellation of false Caste Certificate. --(1) Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a person not belonging to any of the Schedule Caste, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes or Special Backward Category has obtained a false caste certificate to the effect that either himself or his children belong to such Castes, Tribes, or Classes, the Scrutiny Committee may, suo motu, or otherwise call for the record and enquire into the correctness of such certificate and if it is of the opinion that the certificate was obtained fraudulently, it shall, by an order cancel and confiscate by following such procedure as prescribed, after giving the person concerned an opportunity of being heard and communicate the same to the concerned person and the concerned authority, if any.

(2) The order passed by the Scrutiny Committee under this Act shall be final and shall not be challenged before any authority or Court except the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."

6. Section 9 confers on the Scrutiny Committee all powers of a civil Court and in particular in respect of matters mentioned therein. Section 10 of the said Act provides that the benefit secured on the basis of the false caste certificate shall be liable to be withdrawn. Section 11 deals with offences and penalties and provides that whoever obtains a false caste certificate by furnishing false information or filing false statement or documents or by any other fraudulent means, shall, on conviction, be punished, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend upto two years or with fine which shall not be less than two thousand rupees, but which may extend upto twenty thousand rupees or both.

7. On a bare perusal of the provisions of the said Act it is clearly seen that the legislature intended to provide a complete code for the purpose of regulating issuance and verification of caste certificates belonging to certain Caste, Tribes and Classes. Section 7 of the said Act provides that the Scrutiny Committee may, suo motu, or otherwise call for the record and enquire into the correctness of such certificate and if it is of the opinion that the certificate was obtained fraudulently, it shall, by an order cancel and confiscate the certificate. Thus the Scrutiny Committee has power of verification in respect of any caste certificate which has been obtained either by furnishing false information or by filing false statement for documents or by any other fraudulent means. The powers conferred by Section 7 on the Scrutiny Committee are very wide and cover all caste certificates including bogus and fabricated certificates. While exercising its powers the Scrutiny Committee can exercise all powers of civil Court including summoning and enforcing attendance of any person and examining him on oath, requiring the discovery and production of any documents, requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any Court or office and issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents. In the light of the legislative intention in enacting the said Act and the statutory powers conferred on the Scrutiny Committee which has been invested with exclusive jurisdiction to examine the correctness of the caste certificate, it is not possible to accept the submission of Mr. Manohar that the Scrutiny Committee has no jurisdiction to enquire into the question as to whether the caste certificate granted in favour of the petitioner is bogus or false. In our opinion, the provisions of the Act confer sufficiently wide powers on the Scrutiny Committee to conduct investigation even with regard to such bogus and fabricated caste certificates. Therefore the submission of Mr. Manohar that the Scrutiny Committee has no jurisdiction to enquire into the genuineness of the caste certificate issued to the petitioner is liable to be rejected.

8. The next submission of Mr. Manohar is that even assuming that, the Scrutiny Committee has jurisdiction to investigate into the allegation that the caste certificate was forged or fabricated, the Committee has violated the principles of natural justice. We find considerable substance in the submission of the learned counsel. The Scrutiny Committee has based its decision entirely on the enquiry report submitted by the District Magistrate. The material portion of the order of the Scrutiny Committee is reproduced below :

"In this connection after the complaint was filed which was received by the Committee, the Committee noticed the complainant and non complainant to remain present before the Committee in its office and submit the evidence from time to time. Similarly the Committee by its letter no. VSKN/JPP/NMCH-416 dated 12-6-2002 has made a request to the District Magistrate Nagpur to let the Committee know whether the original tribe certificate shown to have been issued vide Rev Case No. 3911/MRC-81/96-97 dated 3-7-1997 has been really issued through his office. The enquiry report from the Dist. Magistrate Nagpur was received vide letter no Home Sec. 14(4)/JPP/D/898/02 dated 11-9-2002. Even though the abovesaid certificate of tribe has been issued on the stationery noting paper of the offices, but the granting authority Shri N. S. Nagarale Deputy Collector, Retired having disowned the signature on the certificate to be of his, the report says that it becomes a bogus certificate.

CONCLUSION OF THE COMMITTEE --

The contention of the complainant that Shri Annaji Maroti Raut has contested the election on submitting a bogus tribe certificate is true. Therefore the Committee is taking a decision that the tribe certificate issued vide Revenue Case No. 3911/MRC/81/96-97 Nagpur dated 3-7-1997 is invalid."

9. It is not disputed before us that the District Magistrate conducted the enquiry without notice to the petitioner. It is seen from the report of the Dist. Magistrate that the certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was duly entered into the revenue register and is in the prescribed proforma. However, relying upon the statement of N. A. Nagarale Dy. Collector (retired) where he has disowned his signature on the certificate, the District Magistrate has concluded that "Therefore, even though the above certificate is given on official registration paper stationery, still according to the statement of Shri N. A. Nagarale, Dy. Collector (retired) he having denied his signature on the said certificate, it becomes bogus and invalid." In our opinion, it was the duty of the Scrutiny Committee to conduct independent enquiry into the question of genuineness of the caste certificate and the Committee has committed error in relying upon the report of the District Magistrate which was prepared and submitted without notice to the petitioner.

10. In the result, in view of the foregoing discussion, the impugned order of the Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside. The Scrutiny Committee is directed to conduct fresh inquiry and decide the issue as to whether the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner is genuine and if the certificate is found to be genuine whether the petitioner belongs to Nomadic Tribe (Otari). Needless to say that the Scrutiny Committee shall not take into consideration the report submitted by the Dist. Magistrate. The Committee shall complete the enquiry and pass appropriate order within 3 months. All contentions of the parties on merits are left open.

Rule is made absolute in terms mentioned in the above order. No order as to costs.