Karnataka High Court

M.R. Thontaradhaya vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 February, 2024

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                                            -1-
                                                     NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                                  WP No. 26658 of 2023




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                        BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                       WRIT PETITION NO. 26658 OF 2023 (GM-CC)


               BETWEEN:

               1.    M.R.THONTARADHAYA
                     S/O RUDRAYYA
                     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

               2.    KUMAR MANOJ ARADHAYA M.T.,
                     S/O M.R.THONTARADHAYA
                     MINOR
                     U/G OF PETITIONER OF NO.1.

               3.    KUMAR RAHUL ARADHAYA M.T.,
                     S/O M.R.THONTARADHAYA
                     MINOR
                     U/G OF PETITIONER NO.1.
Digitally signed
by NAGAVENI
                     PETITIONER NO.1 TO 3 ARE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF             R/AT VADDARAHALLI
KARNATAKA            TUMAKURU TALUK
                     TUMAKURU - 572 101.

               4.    SRI SHANMUKHASWAMY
                     S/O SIDDARAMAIAH S.G.,
                     AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

               5.    SMT.SHOBA S.,
                     W/O SHANMUKHASWAMY
                     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.
                              -2-
                                      NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                   WP No. 26658 of 2023




6.   SRI NUTHAN S.,
     S/O SHANMUKHASWAMY
     AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

7.   KUMARI SHILPA S.,
     D/O SHANMUKHASWAMY
     MINOR
     U/G OF PETITIONER NO.4.

     PETITIONERS 4 TO 7 ARE
     R/AT 8TH MAIN ROAD
     S. S. PURAM
     TUMAKURU - 572 102.

8.   SRI SARPABHUSAN G.S.,
     S/O SIDDALINGAIAH G.,
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.

9.   SMT. HEMALATHA
     W/O SARPABHUSAN G.S.,
     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

10. SRI. KARTHIK G.S.,
    S/O SARPABHUSAN. G.S .,
    AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.

     PETITIONERS 8 TO 10 ARE
     R/AT NAGANNAPALYA,
     SIRA GATE,
     TUMAKURU.

11. SRI M.S.SACHIDANANDAMURTHY
    S/O M.S. SHANKARAIAH,
    AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
    R/AT VIJAYANAGAR,
                            -3-
                                    NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                 WP No. 26658 of 2023




    TUMAKURU - 572 103.

12. SRI. YOGESH
    S/O. CHANNABASAIAH,
    AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
    R/AT 6TH CROSS,
    BANDAEPALYA,
    TUMAKURU.

13. SRI SHAMBULINGASWAMY B.N.,
    S/O NATARAJU,
    AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
    R/AT BHEEMASANDRA,
    TUMAKURU.

14. SRI SIDDALINGASWAMY B.N.,
    S/O NATARAJU,
    AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
    R/AT BHEEMASANDRA,
    TUMAKURU.

15. SRI NATARAJU
    S/O. GURUPADASWAMY,
    AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
    R/AT BHEEMASANDRA,
    TUMAKURU.

16. SMT. PALLAVI M.S.,
    W/O SHAMBULINGASWAMY,
    AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
    R/AT BHEEMASANDRA,
    TUMAKURU.

17. SRI RAVISHANKAR
    S/O PARAMASHIVAIAH,
    AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
                            -4-
                                    NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                 WP No. 26658 of 2023




    R/AT SHANTINAGARA,
    TUMAKURU.

18. SRI. G. S. SHASHIDHARA
    S/O. SRI. SIDDALINGAIAH,
    AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
    R/AT MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
    SIRA GATE,
    TUMAKURU.

19. KUMARI G.S.RANJITHA
    D/O G.S.SHASHIDHARA,
    AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
    R/AT MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
    SIRA GATE,
    TUMAKURU.

20. KUMARI G.S.MEGHA
    D/O G.S.SHASHIDHARA,
    AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
    R/AT MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
    SIRA GATE,
    TUMAKURU.

21. SRI. NAGESH N. P.
    S/O. PUTTARADHAYA,
    AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
    R/AT K.R.EXTENSION,
    M.G. ROAD,
    TUMAKURU.


                                        ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI R.G.HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
                           -5-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                     WP No. 26658 of 2023




AND:

1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     BY ITS SECRETARY
     REVENUE DEPARTMENT
     M.S.BUILDING
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.   ATALJI JANASNEHI KENDRA
     NADAKACHERI DIRECTORATE
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
     BY ITS DIRECTOR
     XHGP + 2X9
     DEPARTMENT OF
     SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND
     LAND RECORDS
     REVENUE BUILDING
     K.R.CIRCLE
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

3.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     TUMAKURU DISTRICT
     TUMAKURU - 572 101.

4.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
     TUMAKURU SUB DIVISION
     MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA
     TUMAKURU - 572 101.

5.   THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR GRADE-II
     TALUK OFFICE
     TUMAKURU - 572 101.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAHUL CARIAPPA K.S., AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
    SRI C.JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5 (VC))
                                  -6-
                                                NC: 2024:KHC:8507
                                           WP No. 26658 of 2023




      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R4 AND 5 TO OPEN THE WEB PORTAL IN THE
KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE AND UNLOCK THE
PORTAL TO FACILITATE THE PETITIONERS TO DOWNLOAD
THEIR CASTE CERTIFICATES AND GET THE PRINT OF THE
CASTE CERTIFICATE MENTIONED IN PARA 6 OF THE WRIT
PETITION.

      THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                             ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court seeking a direction

by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to respondent

Nos.4 and 5 to open the web portal in the Karnataka State

Government Website and to unlock the portal to facilitate them

to download the caste certificates and get the print of the

same.

2. Heard Sri R.G.Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner,

Sri Rahul Cariappa K.S., learned Additional Government

Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri C. Jagadeesh,

learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 5.

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

3. Facts in brief germane, are as follows:

The petitioners claim to be belonging to Beda Jangama

caste and also claim that they are in possession of certain caste

certificates. Endorsements were issued cancelling their caste

certificates by the authorities, which became the subject matter

of W.P.Nos.55669 - 55701/2018. The co-ordinate bench of this

Court disposed the said petitions on 23.04.2019, holding that

the order of the issuance of caste certificates could not have

been cancelled by the Tahsildhar, as he had become functus

officio. This order was not implemented and the non-

implementation of this order, lead the petitioners to initiate

contempt proceedings in C.C.C.Nos.1497-1529/2019, before

the division bench. The division bench by an order dated

20.11.2019, disposed the contempt petitions by the following

order:

"3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for complainants we are of the considered view present proceedings are to be dropped for the reason that no positive direction has been issued to the respondents to issue caste certificate or there being any direction that portal in the website of the respondent ought to be opened. The complainants had approached the writ court on account of caste certificates issued to them having been cancelled.

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

Said caste certificate, which was issued to complainants came to be cancelled, has been set aside. In other words, caste certificate, which was already issued to complainants would automatically be valid and as such question of directing respondents in this proceedings to issue fresh caste certificate would not arise. Hence, contempt proceedings are dropped. However, complainants would be at liberty to take steps as may be available to them under law."

(Emphasis supplied)

After which, the very same petitioners filed

W.P.Nos.16426/2021, on the score that their representations

were rejected by issuing endorsements by the Assistant

Commissioner; when they call this in question before the

Deputy Commissioner seeking a direction to the concerned

Officer for release of their caste certificates, it is then, notices

were issued intimating that enquiry would be held against the

petitioners, which became the subject matter of the writ

petition. This Court following the judgment rendered by the co-

ordinate bench in W.P.Nos.55669-55701/2018 allowed the

petition by the following order:

"4. xxxxxx

In terms of the afore-quoted order, the respondents were directed to issue fresh caste certificates to the complainants / petitioners and it was

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

also observed that, once the orders cancelling the caste certificates were quashed by the order dated 23.04.2019 in W.P.Nos.55669-55701/2018, the caste certificates issued earlier would automatically become valid. On this score, when the petitioners approached respondent No.2

- the Assistant Commissioner with their representations, the Assistant Commissioner issued the impugned endorsements rejecting their representations, on the score that the petitioners have provided false information regarding the caste. It also transpires that the petitioners requested the Deputy Commissioner to issue direction to the concerned Officer for release of the caste certificates. The Deputy Commissioner by the impugned enquiry notices all dated 12.08.2021, directed the petitioners to appear before the Committee for enquiry with regard to their caste. It is these endorsements along with the enquiry notices dated 12.08.2021, issued by respondent No.1, that are called in question in the subject writ petition.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the order which declared the act of the Tahsildar Grade-II in tinkering with the caste certificate earlier issued having become final, there should no impediment for issuance of caste certificate to the petitioner and the authorities are deliberately issuing such endorsements.

6. The learned special counsel representing the respondents would seek to refute the contention of the petitioner and submit that the petitioner does not even belong to the Scheduled Caste, he is Backward Class-A category and has played fraud by securing caste certificate. But, would admit that the Tahsildar could not have reviewed his own order.

7. In the light of what is quoted hereinabove i.e., the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.10446 of 2019, the clear finding of this Court was that the Tahsildar had become functus-officio to review his own order and, therefore, quashed the order dated 31-12- 2018 in review. With the quashment of that order what would emerge is that, the earlier order passed by the Tahsildar would get restored as the Tahsildar by his order dated 17-09-2018 had directed issuance of caste certificate to the petitioner declaring that he belongs to

- 10 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

Beda Jangama community. It is this order of the Tahsildar which would get restored.

8. The impugned endorsements are held to be illegal only on the ground that this Court in Writ Petition No.10446 of 2019, had quashed the order reviewing the earlier order on the ground that the Tahsildar had become functus-officio. In the very same order this Court at para-8 permitted any person, including the 1st respondent, would be at liberty to file an appeal under Section 4-B and F of the Act. Therefore, the said liberty would still operate subject to its availability at this juncture."

The present petition is preferred by the same petitioners

on the score that on the web portal the caste certificates in

their favour are not being accessible. Therefore, accessibility of

the caste certificates on the web portal like any other person,

being denied to the petitioners, has driven them to this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they

would want their caste certificates accessible on the web portal

like any other person, as is available on the web portal. The

direction for the fresh caste certificate is unnecessary as the

contempt Court has clearly observed that the caste certificates

of the petitioners would automatically get restored and also

reserved liberty to initiate proceedings as is available in law in

- 11 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

terms of the afore-quoted order. Therefore, it is as on today,

restored.

5. The issue now is, non-accessibility of the petitioners

caste certificates on the web portal. If the petitioners caste

certificates are automatically restored, as observed by the

division bench and any endorsement being annulled by the

Court, there is no impediment for the caste certificate of the

petitioners to be uploaded on the web portal and facilitate the

petitioners to download the same. Therefore, the State or the

concerned authorities shall forthwith upload the caste

certificates on the web portal and make it accessible like any

other person holding a caste certificate. Liberty as observed

while disposing the earlier writ petitions, stands sustained even

in this order as well.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

a. The writ petition is allowed.

- 12 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8507

b. Mandamus issues to respondent Nos.4 and 5 to upload

the caste certificates on the web portal and make the

caste certificates accessible to the petitioners,

forthwith.