Gujarat High Court
L H Of Late Shri Rajeshbhai Laxmanbhai ... vs Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd on 21 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 186 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1819 of 2006
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
=============================================
L H OF LATE SHRI RAJESHBHAI LAXMANBHAI GARCHAR & ORS.
Versus
PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD. & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2
MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
MS LILU K BHAYA(1705) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. ADMIT. Learned advocates appear and waive service of
notice of admission on behalf of their respective respondents.
2. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15
of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the judgment
and order dated 05.07.2022 passed in the captioned writ
petition by the learned Single Judge, wherein and whereby, the
learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by
the original petitioner - deceased employee assailing his
termination order dated 18.01.2006 and also the report of the
Caste Scrutiny Committee.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
3. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Jigar G. Gadhvi, while
pointing out the findings recorded by the Scrutiny Committee
in the order dated 24.07.2018, has submitted that the report of
the Scrutiny Committee is perfunctory as the Scrutiny
Committee has not appreciated the documentary evidence in
its true perspective. In support of his submissions, he has
placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the
case of Mah. Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti vs.
State of Maharashtra and other, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 326, and
the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the
case Kalubhai Bhagvanbhai Karmata vs. Mamlatdar, Talala,
2003 (2) GCD 1364. He has also referred to the Gujarat
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Classes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste
Certificates) Act, 2018 (in short, "the Act of 2018"). He has
referred to the provisions of Section 8 of the Act of 2018 and
has submitted that appropriate inquiry was required to be
undertaken by the Scrutiny Committee and a definite opinion
was required to be recorded of fraudulent procurement of the
caste certificate by the deceased employee - original
petitioner.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Gadhvi, has also referred to the
Vigat Darshak Card (VDC) No.004449 issued by the Director,
Scheduled Tribe Development, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar on
19.11.1994 to his father and it is submitted that the same
reveals that his ancestral were resident of 'Abudi Ness' Gir at
Taluka Talala. Learned advocate Mr.Gadhvi, has also pointed
out the caste certificate issued by the Mamlatdar, Mangrol on
11.08.2006 certifying that the deceased employee belongs to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
the Rabari Community, which is recognized as Scheduled
Tribes Community. Reference is also made by him to the caste
certificate issued on 03.11.2007 of the Mamlatdar, Mangrol
certifying that he belongs to the Rabari Community, which is a
Scheduled Tribe Community of the State of Gujarat.
5. While referring to the Government Resolution dated
21.01.2010, more particularly Appendix-I, it is submitted by
him that the State Government has recognized the Rabari
Communities, who are residents of Nesses of the Forest of
Alech, Barda and Gir, as a Scheduled Tribe Community since
1956. It is submitted that all the aforesaid mentioned places
(Nesses), which are referred in the documentary evidence, as
mentioned hereinabove, fall within Gir area. Thus, it is
submitted that since the Scrutiny Committee has not
concluded that the caste certificate, which has been issued to
the deceased appellant - original employee on 02.06.1984
(page No.73), which mentions about "Lilapani Ness", is not
declared as fraudulent, the employee ought not to have been
terminated from service on the basis of the report of Scrutiny
Committee. It is submitted that even if the caste certificate of
his father is considered, the same is not doubted by the
Scrutiny Committee, and hence, it cannot be said that his son,
the deceased employee, did not belong to the Rabari
Community. Thus, it is urged that the Scrutiny Committee may
be directed to pass necessary fresh report after considering
the aforesaid documents.
6. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader
Ms.Nirali Sarda, has submitted that the judgment and order
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
passed by the learned Single Judge may not be interfered with,
since all the documentary evidences, which are referred by the
appellants, as mentioned hereinabove, were considered by the
Scrutiny Committee. It is submitted that there is a vast
discrepancy of the places, as referred in the documentary
evidence of the caste certificate of his father - deceased
employee i.e. the original petitioner. She has reiterated the
contents of the documents, as referred by the learned
advocate Mr.Gadhvi, and has submitted that the same are
duly considered by the Scrutiny Committee. It is submitted
that the employee i.e. the original petitioner was unable to
establish the genuineness of the caste certificate, which has
been produced at the time of procurement of his employment.
Thus, it is urged that the present appeal may not be
entertained.
7. Learned Advocate Ms.Bhaya appearing for the
respondent no.1, has submitted that the action of termination
has been taken on the basis of the declaration of the Scrutiny
Committee, which has cancelled the caste certificate of the
employee.
8. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. We have also perused the judgment and
order passed by the learned Single Judge.
9. The original petitioner(since deceased represented
through his legal heirs) was appointed as a Tracer on
10.03.1989. At the time of his appointment, he had produced a
caste certificate dated 02.06.1984 issued by the Mamlatdar,
Visavader showing himself as "Rabari" a Schedule Tribe. On
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
06.04.2005, he was called upon by the respondent no.1 to
produce his original caste certificate. Thereafter, the petitioner
entered into various communications between the State
authority - Mamlatdar and the respondent no.1, but he was
unable to produce the original caste certificate or
contemporaneous record showing that he belonged to ST
Category, and hence he was terminated from service by the
order dated 18.01.2006 by holding that he had obtained the
service by committing fraud by producing fake caste
certificate.
10. It appears that pursuant to the interim order dated
02.05.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in the
captioned writ petition, the case of the petitioner was referred
to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The relevant paragraphs of
the order dated 02.05.2018 read as under:-
"3. In view of the guidelines laid down by the previous decisions
of this Court including Special Civil Application No. 4108 of
2000 and Special Civil Application No. 5189 of 2000, the
petitioner will appear before the committee constituted under
The Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Sachivalaya,
Gandhinagar and will submit his application, affidavit and other
relevant documents to this committee.
4. The committee will scrutinize the application, affidavit and
documents produced by the petitioner and will give its report to
this Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of
copy of this order. The committee will also take into
consideration the notifications and modifications issued by the
Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi dated 29.10.1956 in which
Rabari Community has been included in the list of Scheduled
Tribes category."
11. Thereafter, the Caste Scrutiny Committee, after hearing
the petitioner and on examination of the documents, prepared
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
a Report dated 24.07.2018, declared the Caste Certificates
dated 02.06.1984 issued by the Mamlatdar, Visavader and
11.08.2006 issued by Mamlatdar, Mangrol as illegal, and as a
sequel cancelled the same. The Committee had also relied
upon the Vigilance Report dated 09.07.2018.
12. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition
while placing reliance on the findings of the Scrutiny
Committee, which incorporates the investigation of the
Vigilance Cell. The same are incorporated in paragraph No.13
of the judgment and order, which is as under : -
"13. The contention of the petitioner placed on record along with an
affidavit dated 04.05.2010 placing on record the Caste Certificate
dated 11.08.2006 issued by the Mamlatdar, Mangrol. It is pertinent to
observe that the Scrutiny Committee had also examined this issue
including the issue of the subsequent Caste Certificate of 2006. The
certificates were examined in two stages i.e. at the stage of Vigilance
Cell and by the Scrutiny Committee. Both the authorities have
independently made observations regarding the certificates, which is
reproduced as under:-
"Investigation opinion of Vigilance Cell The caste certificate
obtained from the Mamlatdar, Visavadar on 02/06/1984 is not
available with Shri Rajesh Lakshman Garachar. Moreover,
record regarding issuance of the same is not found at
Mamlatdar, Visvadar. It has not been issued by their office.
Moreover, the caste certificate of Schedule Tribe obtained form
Mamlatdar, Mangrol on 11/08/2006 was issued on the basis of
masvadi receipt of 1941. Therefore, as the receipt for the
duration of 1947 to 1956 is not available, the same is not the
authentic evidence for the residence of the ancestors prior to
1956. Moreover, Shri Rajesh Lakshman Garachar has not
produced any other evidence regarding residence of his
ancestors prior to 1956. 'Abudi-nes' is mentioned in the detail
Vigat Darshak Card produced by Shri Rajesh Lakshman
Garachar. Where as, the caste certificate dated 11/08/2006
obtained from Mamlatdar, Mangrol was issued on the basis of
evidence from Lilapani-nes. Considering the same, permanent
residence of his ancestors is not established in both of these
evidences. Therefore, the Vigilance Cell recommends to cancel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
both the caste certificate, obtained from Mamlatdar Visavadar
on 02/06/1984 and from Mamlatdar Magrol on 11/08/2006.
Conclusions of the Scrutiny Committee. 1) In connection with
the Schedule Tribes caste certificate of Shri Rajesh
Lakhmanbhai Garchar obtained vide caste certificate
No.A.D.M.C./6/84 issue date 02/06/1984 from Mamlatdar
Visavadar, it has been informed vide letter dated 01/06/2005 of
the Mamlatdar Visavadar that, upon examining the record of
this office, it appears that, the caste certificate regarding
Schedule Tribes was not issued from this office to Rajesh
Lakshman Garchar from Rabari caste. 2) Shri Rajesh
Lakshmanbhai Garchar obtained second caste certificate vide
certificate No.1124/06 of the Mamlatdar Mangrol dated
11/08/2006. The same was issued on the basis of masvadi
reciept No.51331 dated 26/09/1941. As per the government
resolution dated 21/01/2010, only the receipts from 1947 to
1956 are valid. Therefore, the caste certificate issued by
Mamlatdar Mangrol on 11/08/2006 is liable to be rejected."
14. In the opinion of the Court, the Vigilance Cell as well as Scrutiny
Committee had arrived at such a conclusion in view of the
discrepancy found in the details provided in the "Vigatdarshak Card"
where the claim is that the petitioner belongs to the Schedule Tribe
in view of his claim to be residing in a Ness at Abudiness, whereas
the certificate issued by the Mangrol Mamlatdar on 11.08.2006 is
based on the claim made by the petitioner to be the member of the
Scheduled Caste, as he was the resident of "Lilapani" Ness. This
being a crucial information on the basis of which the status of
Scheduled Tribe can be decided, cannot be disregarded, and
therefore, correctly considered by the Scrutiny Committee. No error
can be found in this."
13. After perusing the aforesaid report of the Scrutiny
Committee, we have noticed that it is not doubted by the State
authorities that the writ petitioner (deceased employee) did
not belong to the Rabari Community, which is recognized as a
Scheduled Tribe in the State of Gujarat, and the caste
certificate is cancelled only on the premise of area (Ness)/
Forest in which the Rabari community, a nomadic tribe used to
reside or migrate.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
14. At this stage, we may refer to the Appendix-I of the
Government Resolution dated 21.01.2010, which mentions
that the Rabari Community, which is residing in the Nesses of
the Forest of Alech, Barda and Gir are recognized as Scheduled
Tribe Community. This position has been prevailing since the
year 1956, when the Notification dated 29.10.1956 was issued
by the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of India.
15. The issue relating to the caste of the petitioner only
revolves around the three Neses (area) of the nomadic tribe
Rabari. It is not in dispute that his father and forefathers
belonged to the Rabari Tribe. Following documents are
produced on record of the writ petition to establish the caste of
the deceased employee.
16. The first document is the caste certificate, which has
been produced by the original petitioner - deceased appellant
at the time of procuring his employment. The same is dated
02.06.1984 issued by the Mamlatdar Office, Visavadar. The
same mentions about "Lilapani Ness" and it is certified that the
petitioner - deceased employee belongs to the Rabari
Community and the same is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe
Community as per the Circular issued by the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes Department dated 26.06.1978.
17. The second document is the Vigat Darshak Card
No.004449 dated 19.11.1994 issued by the Director of the
Scheduled Tribe Development, Gandhinagar. The same refers
that the ancestor or forefather of the appellant(s) were the
residents of "Abudi Ness" Gir, Taluka Talala, which definitely
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
comes in Barda area, which is recognized area for designating
Rabari Tribe as Schedule Tribe by the State.
18. The third document, is the caste certificate issued by the
Mamlatdar, Mangrol dated 11.08.2006 in favour of the
petitioner certifying that he belongs to the Scheduled Tribe
Category, however, the ness area is mentioned as "Lilapani".
This certificate is issued on the basis of a "Masvadi" receipt
dated 26.09.1941. This certificate is disbelieved by the
Scrutiny Committee in view of the specific provisions of the
Government Resolution dated 21.01.2010, which has been
issued subsequently to the issuance of the present certificate.
The Government Resolution dated 21.01.2010 more
particularly clause No.7 mentions that any 'Masvadi' receipt,
which has been issued prior to 1947 will not be
considered/accepted, since such receipts were regularly issued
to any person, who were visiting Forest area. Thus, when the
petitioner was appointed in the year 1989, there is no
provision of law, which declared the Masvadi receipts obtained
prior to 1947 as void.
19. The fourth document is the certificate dated 03.11.2007
issued by the same authority i.e. the Mamlatdar, Mangrol
issuing the caste certificate to the petitioner certifying that he
belongs to the Rabari Community, which is Scheduled Tribe in
the State of Gujarat. The said certificate is issued on the basis
of the certificate issued to the father of the original petitioner
i.e. Lakhmanbhai Siyabhai Garchar. In this certificate, the ness
is mentioned as "Lilapani".
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
20. All these documents were available with the Scrutiny
Committee, however the Scrutiny Committee has not
undertaken necessary exercise, as prescribed under the law
inquiring the validity of the aforesaid certificate and also the
area, as mentioned in all these documents. The Scrutiny
Committee is required to come to a definite conclusion that the
forefather i.e. the ancestor of the appellants were either the
residents of particular Ness area or not. It is not in dispute that
Rabari Tribe is a migratory nomadic tribe. They used to
migrate between different areas-"Nesses". The Scrutiny
Committee was under an obligation to arrive at a definite
finding that this nesses areas were originally part of three
Nesses of forest of Alech, Barda and Gir as validated by the
State Government for recognizing the Rabari community as the
Schedule Tribe. The petitioner was also having the "Maswadi"
Receipt of 1941, which is declared unacceptable or void in the
year 2010. There is no finding recorded by the Scrutiny
Committee in this regard. Thus, in our opinion, the learned
Single Judge ought to have considered all these aspects before
applying the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the
case of Kumari Madhuri Patil vs State of Maharashtra, 1994(6)
SCC 241.
21. We may at this stage, refer to the provisions of Section 8
of the Act of 2018, which would be applicable to the case of
the appellants, the same is as under : -
"8. (l)Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a person
not belonging to any of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes or
Other Backward Classes 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
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
by following such procedure as may be prescribed, after giving the
person concerned an opportunity of being heard, and communicate
the same to the concerned person and the concerned authority
(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'
22. Thus, the Scrutiny Committee was mandated by the
aforesaid Rule to arrive on a definite conclusion that the Caste
Certificate produced by the petitioner at the time of procuring
his appointment was obtained 'fraudulently' and in case, such
findings are arrived at, it can order cancellation and
confiscation of the certificate. We do not see any findings in
this report, as to whether the Caste Certificate, was obtained
fraudulently by the petitioner.
23. At this state, we may also record a vital aspect in the
matter, which has been ignored by the learned Single Judge
and i.e. when the issue with regard to doubting the Caste
Certificate of the petitioner was raised, the petitioner filed
various applications before the Mamlatdar, Visavadar to give
the details of the issuance of Caste Certificate and by the
communication dated 21.11.2005, the Mamlatdar, Visavadar
informed the original petitioner - deceased employee that no
record of the persons, who are issued the Caste Certificate
between 1980 to 1985 is available in his office, whereas on
01.06.2005, the Mamlatdar, Visavadar had already informed
the Executive Engineer that the caste certificate of the original
petitioner does not appear to have been issued by his office,
hence, it is intimated by him that no copy can be forwarded to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
the Executive Engineer. Thus, on 01.06.2005, the Mamlatdar
Visavadar informed the Executive Engineer that the Caste
Certificate is not issued by his office, whereas on 21.11.2005
subsequently, when the record is demanded by the original
petitioner, it is informed that no record is available between
1980 to 1985 of those persons, who are issued such Caste
Certificates.
24. It is pertinent to note that the respondent-authorities
have not doubted the caste of the father of the appellant and
also Vigat Darshak Card issued on 19.11.1994, certifying that
his father was resident of 'Abudi Ness' Gir, at Barda area,
which is recognized as per the Policy of the State Government
for determining the Scheduled Tribe, Status of the Rabaries,
residing in such areas.
25. By the communication dated 04.03.2005, written by the
Government of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs to the Deputy
Secretary, Social Justice and Empowerment (T.D. Department),
it was clarified that the phrase "the place of permanent abode
of their parents" would mean that "the terms as parents used
in the said phrase" will include not only the parents, but also
grandparents, and subsequent generation also. It is further
clarified that once a Scheduled Tribe Certificate is issued to a
person born after the date of notification of particular
Presidential Order, based on the permanent abode of his
parents, then his children, grandchildren i.e. successive
generation will also continue to be entitled to claim the status
of Scheduled Tribe, in the state of their ancestral, who were
residing on the date of notification of particular Presidential
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Order. All these aspects were to be required to be considered
by the Scrutiny Committee and we find that there are no
findings recorded in this regard.
26. The Division Bench of this Court in the judgment dated
31.08.2002, passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1670 of 1999,
had highlighted the importance of Vigat Darshak Card, which
has been issued by the State authority. It is held thus : -
"In ordinary course there is no reason to doubt or disbelieve the
correctness of those entries but in a given case even if taking such
entries to be correct on their face value, it may be found that the
holder of such Vigat Darshak Card is not entitled to the Certificate
of being a Scheduled Tribe and in a given case if it is found that
such entries have been wrongly reflected in the Vigat Darshak Card
and the Mamlatdar has any reason or material to doubt the
correctness of such entries, the burden lies upon him to confront
the applicant with the reasons and material to disbelieve such
entries and the Mamlatdar or the concerned Committee may
certainly enter upon such an exercise and to that limited extent we
are of the view that the conclusion arrived at by the learned single
Judge deserves to be modified."
27. Thus, on an overall analysis of the documents, which are
produced on record and after perusal of the findings of the
Scrutiny Committee's Report, we are of the opinion that the
matter requires remand to the Scrutiny Committee to give a
definite findings on the issues, which are referred hereinabove.
The following issues shall be decided by the Scrutiny
Committee.
(A) Whether the deceased petitioner, Shri Rajeshbhai
Laxmanbhai Garcher belonged to the Scheduled Tribe-
Rabari Community.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
(B) Whether the Caste Certificate, issued on 02.06.1984 was
fraudulently obtained by him from the office of the
Mamlatdar, Visavadar or not.
(C) Whether the Scrutiny Committee doubts the caste of the
father of the deceased employee to the effect that he
does not belong to Scheduled Tribe-Rabari Community.
(D) The Scrutiny Committee shall conclude, as to whether
the areas of "Lilapani Ness" and "Abudi Ness" would fall
in Barda area or in Gir, Barda or Alech area, and the
forefathers of the petitioner were residing in such area.
(E) The Scrutiny Committee shall consider all the documents
as mentioned hereinabove, including the "Maswadi"
Receipt of 1941, and the same shall not be discarded by
placing reliance on the Clause 7 of Government
Resolution dated 21.01.2010.
28. The Scrutiny Committee shall deliver the report within a
period of three months, after hearing the present appellants.
29. It is further clarified that in case, the Scrutiny Committee
comes to the conclusion that the petitioner or his father belong
to the Scheduled Tribe, such report shall be communicated to
the respondent No.1 - Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. and
the appellants, for undertaking further necessary exercise. It
goes without saying that in case, the report is in favor of the
appellants, the Respondent no.1 shall withdraw the order of
termination dated 18.01.2006, and grant all consequential
benefits to the appellants. We also further clarify that it will be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/186/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
open for the appellants to assail any decision, which is adverse
to them.
30. The impugned judgment and order passed by the learned
Single Judge is quashed. We also set aside the opinion of the
Vigilance Cell and the Report of the Scrutiny Committee.
31. With the aforesaid observations, the Letters Patent
Appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI,J)
MAHESH/22
