Karnataka High Court
Naganna S/O Kallappa Batageri vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 23 June, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
1 W.P.No.201453/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO.201453/2022 (GM-CC)
BETWEEN:
Naganna S/o Kallappa Batageri,
Age: 48 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o Kavalaga-B,
Tq. & Dist : Kalaburagi
... Petitioner
(By Smt. Hema L.Kulakarni &
Sri Manjunath Ginni, Advocates)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department,
M.S.Building, Bangalore-560001.
2. The State of Karnataka,
Through Under Secretary-2,
Social Welfare Department,
Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore-01.
3. The Assistant Commissioner,
Kalaburagi, Dist : Kalaburagi - 585 101.
4. The Tahsildar, Kalaburagi,
Tq. & Dist: Kalaburagi- 585101.
5. The Revenue Inspector,
Tq. & Dist: Kalaburagi-585101.
... Respondents
(By Sri C.Jagadish, Special Counsel for R1 to R4)
2 W.P.No.201453/2022
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue writ of certiorari
quashing the impugned circulars vide No:¸ÀPÀE 23 J¸ïJr
2009 dated 06.06.2020 issued by the respondent No.2 vide
Annexures 'C' and 'C1' in respect of petitioner; issue writ of
certiorari quashing the impugned orders vide
No.¸ÀPÁ®/01/2020-21 dated 06.07.2021 passed by the
respondent No.3 at Annexure-G and consequent to quash the
impugned endorsement dated 20.09.2020 issued by the
respondent no.4 vide Annexure-F and issue writ of
mandamus directing the respondent No.4-Tahsildar to issue
caste certificate in favour of the petitioner as Schedule Tribe
forthwith.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with a
prayer to quash the impugned Circulars vide Annexures 'C'
and 'C1' dated 06.06.2020 and 31.08.2020 issued by
respondent No.2 and the impugned order dated 06.07.2021
vide Annexure-G passed by respondent No.3 and consequent
to quash the impugned endorsement dated 20.09.2020
issued by the respondent No.4 vide Annexure-F and further
direct the respondent No.4-Tahasildar to issue caste
certificate in favour of the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as
well as the learned Special Counsel Sri C.Jagadish appearing
for respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the dispute involved in this writ petition is covered by the
order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ
Petition No.201770/2021 and Writ Petition No.201711/2021
wherein in identical circumstances this Court has quashed
the endorsement impugned in the writ petition and has
directed the Tahasildar to issue caste certificate in favour of
the petitioner therein in accordance with law in the light of
the observation made in the order passed in the said writ
petition.
4. Learned Special counsel Sri C.Jagadish submits
that in the list of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
published by the State Government it is seen in Sl.No.88(h)
that it is mentioned as Talawara or Talawara Boya and in the
case on hand the petitioner has not made it specific whether
he belongs to Talawara or Talawara Boya community and
therefore, the Tahasildar while holding an enquiry is required
to be directed by this Court to consider this aspect of the
matter.
5. From the arguments addressed on both sides, it
is clear that in identical circumstances this Court in Writ
Petition No.201770/2021 and in Writ Petition
No.201711/2021 disposed of on 02.02.2022 has held that
the person who belongs to Talawara community are also
entitled for the benefits in terms of the Karnataka Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes
(Reservation for Appointments, etc.) Rules, 1990 and also for
the benefit under Circular No.SWD 180 SAD 2020(P) dated
29.01.2022. This court while quashing the impugned
endorsement has reserved liberty to the Tahasidlar to hold
an enquiry before issuing the Caste Certificate in favour of
petitioner, though the petitioner had claimed that he was
already declared as Talawara community and therefore, he
was entitled for the caste certificate and more so having
regard to the judgment of this Court in the case of Kumari
Madhuri Patil and another vs. Addl. Commissioner,
Tribunal Development and others reported in AIR 1995
SC 94.
6. Having regard to the specific objection raised by
the learned Special Counsel Sri C.Jagadish, during the course
of enquiry the Tahasildar is required to take into
consideration as to whether the petitioner belonged to
Talawara or Talawar Boya community.
7. It is needless to state that the Tahasildar while
holding an enquiry pursuant to the order passed in this writ
petition shall take into consideration the said objection raised
by the Special Counsel and thereafterwards consider the case
of the petitioner for issuance of caste certificate in
accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, petition is disposed of in terms of
the order passed in Writ Petition No.201770/2021 and in Writ
Petition No.201711/2021 and consequently the impugned
order dated 06.07.2021 vide Annexure-G passed by
respondent No.3 and the endorsement dated 20.09.2020
issued by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-F are quashed and
Tahasildar shall issue caste certificate in favour of petitioner
in accordance with law and in the light of observation made
herein above.
Sd/-
JUDGE
sn
