Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shruti Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 15 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 421 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. SHRUTI BAGHEL D/O SHRI JANKI PRASAD BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT 1850/1 COAL
MINES OFFICE ROAD GUPTESHWAR JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ADITI BAGHEL D/O SHRI JANKI PRASAD BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O 1850/1 COAL
MINES OFFICE ROAD GUPTESHWAR JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. UDIT BAGHEL S/O SHRI JANKI PRASAD BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O 1850/1 COAL
MINES OFFICE ROAD GUPTESHWAR JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ADITYA AHIWASI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND
EMPOWERMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER(REVENUE) SEONI DISTRICT
SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, S E O N I DISTRICT SEONI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ANSHUMAN SWAMY - PANEL LAWYER)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 07/12/2022 by which the claim of
the petitioners as regards grant of caste certificate has been declined.
2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners belong to caste "Bagri" which is
a recognized Scheduled Caste and therefore, the caste certificate ought to have been
granted to the petitioners. It is contended by the counsel that the caste certificate has
been declined under the garb of an order which was passed by the High Power
Committee way back on 12/03/2003 contained in Annexure P/2.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that whether the petitioners
belong to caste "Bagri" is a debatable issue and the same requires evidence which the
petitioners should adduce before the High Power Committee and this disputed question
of facts cannot be gone into in the present petition, therefore, submits that this petition
deserves to be dismissed.
4. No other point is pressed or argued by the parties.
5. Heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the record.
6. A perusal of order dated 28/04/2020 reflects that the petitioners'
application for grant of caste certificate was declined in view of the decision of High
Power Committee dated 12/03/2003 (Annexure P/2). The High Power Committee vide
said decision observed that the surname "Bagri/Bagdi" has been used by the persons
who are Rajpoot or Thakur by caste and such persons are not entitled to be recognized
as "Bagri" which is a recognized Scheduled Caste. Therefore, as to whether the
petitioners belong to caste "Bagri" is a question which requires to be dealt with by the
High Power Committee after sifting of evidence which is to be adduced by the petitioners
in terms of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs.
Additional Commissioner reported in 1994 SCC (6) 241.
7. Considering the aforesaid, present petition stands disposed of with a
direction to the petitioners to approach the High Power Committee within a period of 15
days from today for the purposes of decision as to whether the petitioners herein belong
to caste "Bagri" or not. The High Power Committee upon receipt of the petitioners'
representation shall deal with the issue without being influenced with the impugned order
dated 07/12/2022 within a further period of 60 days while affording opportunity of
hearing and to adduce evidence to the petitioners.
8. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
Astha
