Smt.Susheela H.T vs Deputy Commissioner
2025 Latest Caselaw 5872 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5872 Kant
Judgement Date : 21 August, 2025

Karnataka High Court

Smt.Susheela H.T vs Deputy Commissioner on 21 August, 2025

                                           -1-
                                                    NC: 2025:KHC:32592-DB
                                                     WA No. 1685 of 2024


                HC-KAR




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                         DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

                                        PRESENT

                      THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

                                          AND

                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

                          WRIT APPEAL NO. 1685 OF 2024 (GM-CC)
               BETWEEN:
               1.   SMT.SUSHEELA H.T
                    W/OLATE SOMASHEKHARA K G
                    AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

               2.   SRI KUSHAL K S
                    S/O LATE SOMASHEKHARA K G
                    AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

               3.   SRI KAVAN KUMAR K S
                    S/O LATE SOMASHEKHARA K G
                    AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
Digitally
signed by
AMBIKA H B          ALL ARE RESIDING AT
Location:           KONANDUR MAIN ROAD
High Court
of Karnataka        KONANDUR POST
                    KONANDUR VILLAGE
                    AGARAHARA HOBLI
                    THIRTHAHALLI TALUK
                    SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 422
                                                          ...APPELLANTS
               (BY SRI. RAKSHITH K S, ADVOCATE)

               AND:
               1.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
                    SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 201
                                -2-
                                             NC: 2025:KHC:32592-DB
                                              WA No. 1685 of 2024


 HC-KAR




2.   TAHASILDAR
     THIRTHAHALLI TALUK
     SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G, AGA)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 30.08.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP No.1852/2023 (GM-
CC) AND ALLOW TH WP AS PRAYED FOR UNDER THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
       and
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

                       ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU,CHIEF JUSTICE)

The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an

order dated 30.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ

Petition No.1852/2023 (GM-CC) captioned 'Smt. Susheela H T and

Ors. v. Deputy Commissioner and Another'. The appellants had

filed the said petition impugning the respective caste certificates

issued by respondent No.2 (the Tahsildar).

NC: 2025:KHC:32592-DB

HC-KAR

2. It is the case of the appellants that the said certificates

incorrectly mention their caste as 'Vokkaliga caste' instead of

"Bhovi" community, which the appellants claim is their caste. The

learned Single Judge had declined to entertain the petition on the

ground that the appellants have a remedy of statutory appeal under

Section 4D of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes

and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment, etc.)

Act, 1990 [the Act].

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits

that an appeal under Section 4D of the Act would not lie as no

order has been passed under Section 4C of the Act by the

Verification Committee. He submits that the certificates have been

issued by respondent No.2 and the appellants' grievance is limited

to the incorrect caste being mentioned in the said certificates. He

also contends that the earlier certificates issued to the appellants

had correctly reflected their caste as 'Bhovi'. However, the same

had been arbitrarily changed in the fresh certificates issued by

respondent No.2.

NC: 2025:KHC:32592-DB

HC-KAR

4. We note that in terms of Section 4A of the Act, any candidate

or his parent or guardian is entitled to make an application to the

Tahsildar in such manner for issuance of a caste certificate.

Indisputably, the appellants have applied for caste certificate to the

Tahsildar under the said provisions.

5. Section 4B of the Act provides for a remedy of an appeal

against any order that has been passed under Section 4A of the

Act. Section 4B of the Act is set out below:

"4-B. Appeal against order under Section 4-A.-

(1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Tahsildar under Section 4-A may, within thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, prefer an appeal to Assistant Commissioner of the Revenue sub-division.

(2) The Assistant Commissioner of the Revenue Sub-division may after giving both parties an opportunity of being heard pass orders allowing or dismissing the appeal and in appropriate cases directing issue of a caste certificate, or as the case may be, an income and caste certificate to the applicant."

6. In the present case, the appellants are aggrieved by the

issuance of the certificates reflecting their caste as Vokkaliga which

according to the appellants is erroneous. In the aforesaid view, the

NC: 2025:KHC:32592-DB

HC-KAR

appellants have a remedy of an appeal under Section 4B of the

Act.

7. We, accordingly, dispose of the present appeal by leaving it

open for the appellants to avail their statutory remedy. We also

note that the time available for filing such an appeal has expired.

The present appeal has also been filed after a delay of 406 days,

notwithstanding the same we consider it apposite to direct that if