Delhi High Court
Arun Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors. on 30 January, 2015
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: January 30, 2015
+ W.P.(C) 36/2014
ARUN KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Petitioner in person
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Represented by: Ms.Manita Verma, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (ORAL)
1. The candidature of the petitioner as the member of a Schedule Caste,
for being appointed as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force has been
turned down by the respondents on account of an alleged deficiency in the
Caste Certificate submitted by the petitioner to the respondents.
2. The Caste Certificate dated August 18, 1993 has been issued by the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patel Nagar/Civil Lines. It bears the No.037239.
It is in Hindi. Translated, it reads as under:-
"It is certified that Sh.Arun Kumar Son of Sh.Lakhi Ram R/o B-
197, Karampura, New Delhi, belong to schedule caste (Jatav),
Union Capital Territory of Delhi which is recognized by the
Constitution (Schedule Castes) (Union Territory) Order, 1951,
Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe Schedule (Amended), 1956 and
Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe Order (Amended) Act, 1976.
2. Sh.Arun Kumar and/or Family resides at B-197, Karampura,
New Delhi under the Union Capital Territory of Delhi."
3. As per the counter affidavit filed, the advertisement inviting
applications, vide Annexure C, had specified the form in which the Caste
Certificate had to be drawn up. The said annexure has not been annexed
with the counter affidavit but copy thereof has been handed over by counsel
for the respondent to us in Court today. The proforma prescribed reads as
under:-
"This is to certify that Shri/Shrimati/Kumari ............ son/daughter
of .......................... of ....................village/town ........................in
District/Division ......................... of the State/Union Territory
....................... belongs to the ........................ Caste/Tribe which is
recognized as Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe under:
The Constitution (Schedule Cast) Order 1950
The Constitution (Schedule Tribes) Order 1950
The Constitution (Schedule Castes (Union Territories) Order 1951
The Constitution (Schedule Tribes) (Union Territories) Order 1951
As amended by the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Lists
(Modification) Order, 1956, the Bombay Reorganization Act,
1960, the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1956, the State of Himachal
Pradesh Act, 1970 and the North Eastern Areas (Reorganization)
Act, 1971 and the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes Orders
(Amendment) Act, 1976.
The Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Schedule Castes Order,
The Constitution (Andaman and Nicobar Islands) Scheduled
Tribes Order, 1959 as amended by the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment Act, 1976)
The Constitution (Dadar and Nagar Haveli) Scheduled Caste
Order 1968
The Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964
The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Uttar Pradesh) Order, 1967
The Constitution (Goa, Daman and Diu) Scheduled Castes Order,
The Constitution (Goa, Daman and Diu) Scheduled Tribes Order,
The Constitution (Nagaland) Scheduled Tribes Order, 1970
The Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Caste Order 1978
The Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Tribes Order 1978
ii) Shri/Shrimati/Kumari ................................ and of his/her family
ordinarily reside(s) in village/town .............................. of
......................... District/Division ..............................of the
State/Union Territory of ...........................
Signature ..........................
Designation.....................
(With seal of office)
State/Union Territory"
4. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the defect in the Caste
Certificate produced by the petitioner is that it does not make a reference to
the complete contents of the proforma of the Certificate indicated as per
Annexure C.
5. The respondents are overlooking the fact that a person would be
certified to be a member of a Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe with
reference to a particular Constitution SC/ST Order and if there are more than
one issued, it would be sufficient to make reference to the one applicable to
the person who is certified by the Competent Authority as being a member
of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
6. It is not that the authority issuing the Certificate would act as a
copycat, and in the Certificate blindly copy the language of the annexure and
make reference to all the orders issued from time to time, be the original or
amending the Constitution Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Orders
issued from time to time.
7. As regards the petitioner, the Certificate relied upon by him clearly
certified that he belongs to the Schedule Caste: Jatav in the Union Territory
of Delhi which is recognized by The Constitution (Schedule Castes) (Union
Territories) Order, 1950 and also in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes, (Amendment Order), 1956 as amended by the Schedule Caste and
Schedule Tribe Amendment Order, 1976, as a Scheduled Caste.
8. We dispose of the writ petition declaring that the Caste Certificate
produced by the petitioner is as per the proforma prescribed.
9. At the stage, learned counsel for the respondent states that since the
department has held the Certificate to be invalid, it did not check from the
issuing authority whether it was a genuine certificate. Counsel states that in
the past it has transpired that fake certificates are being produced.
10. Thus, we dispose of the writ petition declaring as above, and
simultaneously permitting the respondent to get the authenticity thereof
verified from the office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate who had issued the
Certificate in question.
11. Needful shall be done within six weeks.
12. If the Certificate is found to be authentic, candidature of the petitioner
to be appointed as a Constable in RPF under the Scheduled Caste category
would be further processed and taken to its logical conclusion.
13. No costs.
(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
JUDGE
(PRATIBHA RANI)
JUDGE
JANUARY 30, 2015
rb
