Karnataka High Court
Shivanand S/O Channabasappa ... vs The Deputy Commissioner on 24 February, 2022
Bench: Sachin Shankar Magadum
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
R.S.A.NO.100661/2014 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN
SHRI SHIVANAND S/O CHANNABASAPPA HUGAR,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/O BASAVANAKOPPA, TQ: KALAGHATAGI,
DISTRICT : DHARWAD, PIN: 580001.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUNASWAMY B.HIREMATH, ADV.)
AND
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD, PIN: 580001.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (D.D.P.I)
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DORECTOR,
DHARWAD, PIN:580001.
3. THE PRINCIPAL, KARNATAKA HIGH SCHOOL,
DHARWAD, PIN: 580001.
4. THE PRINCIPAL
GOVT. HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL,
SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: ATHANI,
DISTRICT : BELGAUM, PIN: 580001.
5. THE DEPUTY DIRERCTOR,
D.C.COMPOUND, BELGAUM, PIN: 580001.
.... RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 5 : SERVED.)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE
OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING THIS COURT TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DATED 25.08.2014 PASSED
BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) AND CJM,
DHARWAD IN R.A.NO.127/2006 AND CONSEQUENTLY DECREE
THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.334/2005 BY SETTING ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.07.2006 PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., DHARWAD.
2
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
: JUDGMENT :
The captioned second appeal is filed by
unsuccessful plaintiff whose suit for declaration that he
belongs to Hindu-Hugar caste and for consequential
relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendants
to delete the caste Hindu-Lingavant and to enter into
as Hindu-Hugar is declined and suit is dismissed and
confirmed by the First Appellate Court.
2. Facts leading to the above said case are as
follows:
The appellant-plaintiff claims that he belongs to
Hindu-Hugar caste and therefore contends that his
surname is wrongly entered into in School records as
Hindu-Lingavanta. It is specifically averred in the
plaint that on account of wrong entry of his caste he is
not able to secure Government reservation benefit.
Therefore he has filed a suit for declaration and for
consequential relief of mandatory injunction.
3. The Trial Court having assessed the oral
and documentary evidence has come to conclusion
that the appellant-plaintiff has failed to prove that he
belongs to Hindu-Hugar caste as claimed in the plaint.
On these set of reasonings, the Trial Court dismissed
the suit.
4. The Appellate Court having examined the
oral and documentary evidence has not only concurred
with the judgment and decree of the Trial Court but
has come to conclusion that the present suit itself was
not maintainable. The First Appellate Court placing
reliance on Section 4-D of Karnataka Schedule caste,
Schedule Tribe and other Backward Classes
(Reservation of Appointment etc.) Act, 1990 has come
to conclusion that the issue relating to caste and caste
certificate squarely falls within the domain of
competent authority and therefore the jurisdiction of
Civil Court stands excluded. While recording the said
finding the Appellate Court has placed reliance on
reportable judgment rendered by this Court in
RSA.No.1353/2008. Placing reliance on the said
judgment, the appeal is dismissed.
5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
appellant. Perused the judgments under challenge.
6. It is a trite law that issue relating to caste
and also caste certificate falls within the domain of
Tahasildar, who is the competent authority to issue
caste certificate. Therefore, there is a bar under
Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure and in that
background the competent civil court cannot venture
into deciding the controversy relating to caste. Both
the Courts have concurrently held that, such a relief
cannot be granted by a Civil Court.
7. The concurrent findings recorded by the
Courts below do not suffer from any infirmities. No
substantial question of law arises. Accordingly, the
appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
EM
