Madhya Pradesh High Court
Aditi Baghel vs High Powered Caste Scrutiny Committee on 1 May, 2025
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20000
1 WP-39821-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
WRIT PETITION No. 39821 of 2024
ADITI BAGHEL AND OTHERS
Versus
HIGH POWERED CASTE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manoj Sharma - Senior Advocate with Shri Vishal Baghel - Advocate
for the petitioners.
Reserved on : 10.03.2025
Delivered on : 01.05.2025
..............................................................................................................................................
ORDER
Petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India challenging order dated 13.08.2024 (Annexure-
P/7) by which High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee has examined the
Caste Certificate of petitioners and found that petitioners do not belong
to "Bagri Schedule Caste" and made recommendation for cancelling the
Caste Certificate granted to the petitioners and also to initiate
disciplinary action against authority who has issued said Caste
Certificate.
2. Petitioners has challenged impugned order on ground that same
is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law. Respondent No.1 did not
give opportunity of hearing to petitioners. It is submitted that High
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20000
2 WP-39821-2024
Power Caste Scrutiny Committee acted contrary to vigilance report. If
High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee was not satisfied with the
findings of Vigilance Committee then petitioners ought to have supplied
a copy of same and opportunity of hearing ought to have been provided
to them before passing of order. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner has relied upon the order dated 05.09.2024 passed in WP
No.26493/2024 (Rajendra Kumar Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and
other). In said case, High Court has relied upon the report of Vigilance
Committee and rejected subsequent view taken by High Power Caste
Scrutiny Committee. It is submitted that case of petitioners is similar to
aforesaid case. Further, reliance is placed on judgment passed by Apex
Court in case of Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of
Tribe Claim & Others passed in Civil Appeal No.6340/2004 vide order
dated 08.11.2011 by which Apex Court held that the more reliance is to
placed on pre-independence document because he furnishes a higher
degree of probative value to the declaration of status of a caste as
compare to post-independence documents. In these circumstances,
prayer is made to set aside the order dated 13.08.2024 communicated on
05.09.2024 and further to issue direction to respondents authorities to
issue Caste Certificate of "Bagri Schedule Caste" to petitioners.
3. Neither Vakalatnama nor reply has not been filed by Advocate
General Office to contest the case, therefore, vide order dated
10.03.2025, respondents were proceeded ex-parte.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20000
3 WP-39821-2024
4. Heard the counsel for petitioner.
5. On going through the facts of the case of Rajendra Kumar
(Supra) wherein it was held that persons of said caste who fail to
establish criminal background of forefathers cannot be denied benefit of
belonging to Schedule Caste Community, if they are not settled in Seoni
but at Chhindwara. Members of "Bagri" Community came from Malwa
and were involved in criminal activities and were recognized as criminal
Caste. If in recent past, they are not involved in criminal activity, it
cannot be said that persons do not belong to "Bagri" Community. Bagri
community have 20 types of Gotra i.e. Pawar, Yadav, Kohar, Gujratim,
Bamniya, Kumhera, Jadon etc. Further, from Seoni "Bagri" community
has been granted benefit of the Schedule Caste Certificate. "Bagri"
community cannot be said to be parochial to certain places and in
constitutional order "Bagri" Caste was recognized as "Schedule Caste"
for whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh. In said case, document i.e.
certificate of their forefathers from year 1938-39 was filed but was
disbelieved.
6. In this case, impugned order was passed on 13.08.2024 and it
was held that petitioners do not belong to "Bagri" caste. Reasons given
for denying them status of Schedule Caste for as under:-
(1) Their financial status is strong and they own 18.57 hectare of
land and were doing agriculture for 100 years. They were not attached to
traditional occupation of making Mat, Broom and Basket (Chatai, Jhadu
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20000
4 WP-39821-2024
and Tokri) and to do work as agricultural laborers. They are having
relationship with the persons of higher caste and are not treated as
untouchable by them. 7. Superintendent of police in his report has found
after verification of document from Revenue Department, statement of
villagers, information collected from School, residence of ancestral of
petitioners were found to be in Village-Jaitpurakala, Tehsil and District-
Seoni. Said detailed report of Superintendent of Police was overlooked
by High Power Scrutiny Committee only on ground that petitioners'
forefathers were doing agriculture for 100 years and they are owner of
agricultural land and mixing with higher caste people and are not treated
as untouchable. Aforesaid grounds cannot be a ground to deny the
benefit of Schedule Caste status to petitioners. They belong to "Bagri"
Community and their forefathers were also "Bagri". There is statement
of villagers regarding the same and vigilance report is also in their
favour. Moreover, petitioners are residents of Seoni and residence of
"Bagri" Community from Seoni are given Schedule Caste
status. Petitioners are also having documents from year 1950 to be
residing in the same place.
7. As per judgment passed by Apex Court in case of Madhuri
Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development , if report of
vigilance cell consisting senior Superintendent of Police is in favour of a
candidate and his caste is found to be genuine and true, no further action
need be taken except their report or particulars given are found to be
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:20000
5 WP-39821-2024
false or fraudulent. Report of Superintendent of Police was in favour of
petitioner, therefore, High Power Scrutiny Committee in accordance
with the judgment passed in Madhuri (Supra) ought to have allowed the
application.
8. In these circumstances, only because petitioners are having
good economical position, mixing with upper Caste people and are not
in traditional occupation of "Bagri" Community cannot be a reason to
deny them benefit of Schedule Caste. Hence, order passed by High
Power Scrutiny Committee dated 13.08.2024 is set aside. Petition is
allowed.
9. Competent authority i.e. respondent No.2 is directed to issue
Schedule Caste certificate to petitioners.
(VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE
$A
