Gujarat High Court
Punjabhai Khemabhai Damor vs State Of Gujarat on 1 August, 2022
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/16044/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16044 of 2003
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ? NO
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ? NO
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution NO
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
PUNJABHAI KHEMABHAI DAMOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 01/08/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing
and setting aside of the order dated 04.11.2003 passed by the respondent
no.2 cancelling the caste certificate issued to him.
2. Learned advocate Mr.Mangukiya appearing for the petitioner has
submitted that the entire exercise cancelling the caste certificate
undertaken by the respondent authorities, is in violation of principles of
natural justice. He has submitted that the petitioner was called by the
respondent-concerned scrutiny committee and he had accordingly,
appeared on 09.09.2003 before the committee with all the documents,
C/SCA/16044/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022
however, subsequently behind the back of the petitioner, the scrutiny
committee had undertaken the investigation and placed reliance on the
material for cancelling his caste certificate, which was never supplied to
him. Thus, he has submitted that the impugned order may be set aside on
the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
3. In response to the aforesaid submissions, learned AGP Mr.Mehta
has submitted that the Committee had asked the petitioner to show the
certificate of his brother and sister, who were belonging to the Scheduled
Tribes i.e. Hindu Damor. He has submitted that the petitioner accordingly
had supplied the school leaving certificate with regard to his caste.
4. Learned AGP Mr.Mehta, while placing reliance on the affidavit,
has submitted that the scrutiny committee vide letter dated 19.08.2003
had asked the petitioner to remain present and accordingly, he had
remained present with the documents and an opportunity of hearing was
also given to him. Further, it is submitted that the District Vigilance
Officer has collected the information about the doubtful caste certificate
of the petitioner and, after undertaking necessary exercise, has cancelled
his caste certificate. Thus, he has submitted that it cannot be said that no
opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner.
5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
6. It is the case of the petitioner that he was born and brought up in
Gujarat, however his ancestrals were migrant from Rajasthan and he
belongs to Scheduled Tribes known as Damor. The petitioner joined
service as Primary Teacher on 26.07.1975 as a general category candidate
and he had not used his caste certificate at the relevant time. On
C/SCA/16044/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022
09.06.2003, the Development Commissioner informed the petitioner to
supply relevant documents with regard to his caste certificate to his office
and accordingly, the petitioner supplied the same. It appears that, the
petitioner was asked to remain present before the committee along with
all this documents. The petitioner had submitted 36 documents in support
of his submissions proving that he belonged to the Scheduled Tribes
category. Ultimately, by the impugned order, the caste certificate has
been cancelled.
7. It is a specific case of the petitioner that the scrutiny committee had
collected various materials behind his back and has relied upon such
material for cancellation of his caste certificate without supplying the
same to him or affording any opportunity of hearing. In paragraph no.19
of the petition, it has been specifically averred that the opinions of several
persons were called upon, however, not a single document has been
provided to him.
8. While issuing Rule vide order dated 13.09.2004, this Court had
directed the authorities not to take any action pursuant to cancellation of
his certificate and it was also ordered that no further benefits shall be
claimed by the petitioner. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the respondent
authorities have filed reply contending and admitting that the petitioner
had produced 36 documents before the Committee and he had also filed a
reply dated 08.09.2003 supporting that he belongs to the Scheduled
Tribes. It is admitted in the affidavit-in-reply, more particularly,
paragraph no.16 that the scrutiny committee has collected the information
from the Vigilance Officer, Scheduled Tribes, Development,
Panchmahals at Godhra, the appointing authority and other reliable
sources. After considering such material, the certificate of the petitioner
has been cancelled.
C/SCA/16044/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022
9. From the entire tenor of the affidavit-in-reply, the contentions
raised by the petitioner with regard to non supplying of such material, is
not controverted. Thus, the impugned order has been passed on the basis
of the material, which has been collected by the respondent authorities or
the scrutiny committee behind the back of the petitioner and the same is
not supplied to him. It was necessary on the part of the scrutiny
committee to supply such material or at least inform the petitioner about
such material in wake of the fact that the petitioner has participated in the
proceedings before the scrutiny committee and in support of his case, he
had produced 36 documents. Thus, the impugned order is passed in sheer
violation of principles of natural justice and hence, the same is quashed
and set aside.
10. The present petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
ABHISHEK/113
