Karnataka High Court
Kum Nanditha R vs The Superintendent Of Police on 4 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
WP No. 55289 of 2016
C/W WP No. 44107 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 55289 OF 2016 (GM-CC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 44107 OF 2015 (GM-POLICE)
IN WP No. 55289/2016
BETWEEN:
KUM. NANDITHA R
D/O. RACHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT DOOR NO. 16/16,
6TH CROSS,, SHAKTINAGAR,
MYSORE - 570 019.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI H.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
ARUNKUMAR M S
Location: HIGH 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
COURT OF AT THE OFFICE OF
KARNATAKA
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
NO. 42/A, VINAYAMARGA,
SIDDHARTHANAGARA, MYSORE - 570 011.
2. POLICE INSPECTOR
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
MYSORE - 570 011.
3. RAVISHANKARA C.V
AGE NOT KNOWN,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
WP No. 55289 of 2016
C/W WP No. 44107 of 2015
HC-KAR
FATHER NAME IS NOT KNOWN,
STATE PRESIDENT,
KARUNADU SARVODAYA SENE(R),
NO. 282, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 8TH CROSS,
JAYANAGAR, MYSURU - 570 019.
4. THE INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL
SELECTION (IBPS),
90 FEET ROAD, TAHKUR COMPLEX
OFF WESTREN EXPRESS HIGHWAY,
KANDIVALI (E), MUMBAI - 400 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C. JAGADEESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
R3 - SERVED)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENQUIRY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE R-1 & R2 AGAINST
THE PETITIONER AS PER THE NOTICE DATED 20.10.2016 VIDE
ANNEXURE-F ON THE BASIS OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE R-3
BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.
IN WP NO. 44107/2015
BETWEEN:
RACHAIAH
S/O HUCCHAMADEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT DOOR NO. 16/16, 6TH CROSS,
SHAKTINAGAR, MYSORE - 570 019.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI H K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
AT THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
WP No. 55289 of 2016
C/W WP No. 44107 of 2015
HC-KAR
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
NO. 42/A, VINAYAMARGA,
SIDDHARTHANAGARA, MYSORE - 570 011.
2. POLICE INSPECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
MYSORE - 570 011.
3. MAHADEVASWAMY,
AGE: NOT KNOWN,
FATHER NAME IS NOT KNOWN,
R/AT DUGGANAHALLI, MALAVALLI,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430.
4. THE DIRECTOR,
PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION BOARD,
18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560 003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C. JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
R3 - SERVICE OF NOTICE DISPENSED WITH VIDE
ORDER DATED 28.07.2025)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENQUIRY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE R-1 AGAINST
THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-D ON THE BASIS OF THE
CMPLAINT OF THE R-3 BY ISSUING A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
WP No. 55289 of 2016
C/W WP No. 44107 of 2015
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
In W.P.No.55289/2016 petitioner is assailing the
Enquiry proceedings initiated by respondent Nos.1 and 2
against the petitioner as per the Notice dated 20.10.2016
(Annexure-F) on the basis of the complaint addressed by
respondent No.3.
2. In W.P.No.44107/2015 petitioner is assailing
the Enquiry proceedings initiated by respondent No.1
against the petitioner as per the Notice dated 06.07.2015
(Annexure-D) on the basis of the complaint addressed by
respondent No.3.
3. Heard Sri.Ravi H.K., learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners and Sri.C.Jagadish, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
4. Sri.Ravi H.K., learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners contended that respondent authorities have no
jurisdiction to initiate the Enquiry proceedings on the
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
HC-KAR
ground that, respondent No.3-complainant is not an
aggrieved person to challenge the Caste Certificate issued
in favour of the petitioners and in this regard he places
reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in W.A.No.1242/2019 disposed of on 03.06.2021.
Accordingly, he sought for quashing of the impugned
Notices issued by the respondent-authorities.
5. Per contra, Sri.C.Jagadish, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents sought to justify the action
of the respondents.
6. Having taken note of the submissions made by
the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the
jurisdictional Tahsildar issued the Caste Certificate to the
petitioners, identifying the petitioners as belonging to
"Jenu Kuruba" caste. It is also not in dispute that based
on the complaint lodged by respondent No.3, enquiry has
been initiated against the petitioners as per the impugned
Notices. Perusal of the impugned Notices would indicate
that respondent-authorities have not notified under which
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
HC-KAR
jurisdiction, power being exercised hereunder, where the
impugned Notices have been issued to the petitioners. It
is also to be noted that Division Bench of this Court in the
case of R.S.Mahadev vs. B.R.Gopamma and others at
paragraph No.24 which reads as follows:-
"24. That apart, Section 4-B of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment,
etc.) Act, 1990, reads as under:
"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."
On a reading of the same it is evident that the
only a person aggrieved by an order of the Tahsildar
under Section 4-A with regard to issuance of caste
certificate and income certificate, can file a appeal
to the Assistant Commissioner of the Revenue sub-
division and not otherwise."
NC: 2025:KHC:44719
HC-KAR
7. Taking into consideration of the fact that
respondent-authorities have no jurisdiction to issue the
impugned Notices and further respondent No.3 is not an
aggrieved person with regard to issuance of Caste
Certificate in favour of the petitioners, I find force in the
submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners.
8. Accordingly, Writ Petitions are allowed.
9. Impugned Notices at Annexure-F dated
20.10.2016 in W.P.No.55289/2016 and at Annexure-D
dated 06.07.2015 in W.P.No.44107/2015 are hereby
quashed.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
GPG
