Uttarakhand High Court

Sagar Giri vs State Bank Of India on 29 August, 2023

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
             Writ Petition (M/S) No.1681 of 2020
Sagar Giri                                          ....Petitioner

                              Versus

State Bank of India                                ....Respondent

Present:-
             Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Mr. Anil Dabral, Addl. C.S.C. for the State.
             Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the Caveator.


                            JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to order

dated 05.09.2020, by which caste certificate, issued in favour

of the petitioner, has been cancelled.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. The challenge in this petition is made on the

following grounds; factually:-

(i) It is the case of the petitioner that, in fact,

he belongs to the Other Backward Class

category. His caste certificate, which has

been issued on 18.09.2019, has wrongly

been cancelled.

(ii) The constitution of the scrutiny

committee for verification of the caste

certificate is bad for the following

reasons:-

(a) The Scrutiny Committee has not

been constituted, as directed by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and

Another Vs. Addl. Commissioner,

Tribal Development and others

(1994) 6 SCC 241 and as ordered

by this Court in WPMS No.1510 of

2016, Smt. Hirdesh Devi Vs. State

of Uttarakhand and Other, decided

on 02.06.2023.

(b) The Tehsildar, Rishikesh, on

24.01.2020, had concluded that

the petitioner does not belong to

the Other Backward Classes

category. His report was forwarded

by Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Rishikesh to the District

Magistrate, Dehradun. The

Tehsildar, Rishikesh and Sub-

Divisional Magistrate, Dehradun,

both are the part of the Scrutiny

Committee.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that these two

officers have already given their opinion that the caste

certificate is not valid, therefore, their inclusion in the

Scrutiny Committee vitiates the entire proceedings of the

Scrutiny Committee.

5. Learned State Counsel, at the very outset, very

fairly concedes that in the instant case, the Scrutiny

Committee has not been formed, as per the directions of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumar Madhuri

(supra), which has been followed in the case of Smt. Hirdesh

Devi (supra) by this Court. He would submit that the petition

may be decided in terms of the decision given in the case of

Smt. Hirdesh Devi (supra) passed by this Court.

6. In the case of Kumari Madhuri (supra), the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Para 13, has given a procedure as

to how to consider the caste certificate. It reads as follows:-

13. The admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained on the basis of false social status certificate necessarily has the effect of depriving the genuine Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or OBC candidates as enjoined in the Constitution of the benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. The genuine candidates are also denied admission to educational institutions or appointments to office or posts under a State for want of social status certificate. The ineligible or spurious persons who falsely gained entry resort to

dilatory tactics and create hurdles in completion of the inquiries by the Scrutiny Committee. It is true that the applications for admission to educational institutions are generally made by a parent, since on that date many a time the student may be a minor. It is the parent or the guardian who may play fraud claiming false status certificate. It is, therefore, necessary that the certificates issued are scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost expedition and promptitude. For that purpose, it is necessary to streamline the procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval, which may be the following:

1. The application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather than at the Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.

2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars of castes and sub- castes, tribe, tribal community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal communities, the place from which he originally hails from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the Directorate concerned.

3. Application for verification of the caste certificate by the Scrutiny Committee shall be filed at least six months in advance before seeking admission into educational institution or an appointment to a post.

4. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer high-er in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (II) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and (III) in the case of Scheduled Castes another officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificates. In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research

Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.

5. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims. The Inspector would go to the local place of residence and original place from which the candidate hails and usually resides or in case of migration to the town or city, the place from which he originally hailed from. The vigilance officer should personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He should also examine the school records, birth registration, if any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have knowledge of the social status of the candidate and then submit a report to the Directorate together with all particulars as envisaged in the pro forma, in particular, of the Scheduled Tribes relating to their peculiar anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies etc. by the castes or tribes or tribal communities concerned etc.

6. The Director concerned, on receipt of the report from the vigilance officer if he found the claim for social status to be "not genuine" or 'doubtful' or spurious or falsely or wrongly claimed, the Director concerned should issue show-cause notice supplying a copy of the report of the vigilance officer to the candidate by a registered post with acknowledgement due or through the head of the educational institution concerned in which the candidate is studying or employed. The notice should indicate that the representation or reply, if any, would be made within two weeks from

the date of the receipt of the notice and in no case on request not more than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice. In case, the candidate seeks for an opportunity of hearing and claims an inquiry to be made in that behalf, the Director on receipt of such representation/reply shall convene the committee and the Joint/Additional Secretary as Chairperson who shall give reasonable opportunity to the candidate/parent/guardian to adduce all evidence in support of their claim. A public notice by beat of drum or any other convenient mode may be published in the village or locality and if any person or association opposes such a claim, an opportunity to adduce evidence may be given to him/it. After giving such opportunity either in person or through counsel, the Committee may make such inquiry as it deems expedient and consider the claims vis-à-vis the objections raised by the candidate or opponent and pass an appropriate order with brief reasons in support thereof.

7. In case the report is in favour of the candidate and found to be genuine and true, no further action need be taken except where the report or the particulars given are procured or found to be false or fraudulently obtained and in the latter event the same procedure as is envisaged in para 6 be followed.

8. Notice contemplated in para 6 should be issued to the parents/guardian also in case candidate is minor to appear before the Committee with all evidence in his or their support of the claim for the social status certificates.

9.The inquiry should be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably by day-to-day proceedings within such period not exceeding two months. If after inquiry, the Caste Scrutiny Committee finds the claim to be false or spurious, they should pass an order cancelling the certificate issued and confiscate the same. It should communicate within one month from the date of the conclusion of

the proceedings the result of enquiry to the parent/guardian and the applicant.

10.In case of any delay in finalising the proceedings, and in the meanwhile the last date for admission into an educational institution or appointment to an officer post, is getting expired, the candidate be admitted by the Principal or such other authority competent in that behalf or appointed on the basis of the social status certificate already issued or an affidavit duly sworn by the parent/guardian/candidate before the competent officer or non-official and such admission or appointment should be only provisional, subject to the result of the inquiry by the Scrutiny Committee.

11.The order passed by the Committee shall be final and conclusive only subject to the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.

12.No suit or other proceedings before any other authority should lie.

13.The High Court would dispose of these cases as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months. In case, as per its procedure, the writ petition/miscellaneous petition/matter is disposed of by a Single Judge, then no further appeal would lie against that order to the Division Bench but subject to special leave under Article 136.

14.In case, the certificate obtained or social status claimed is found to be false, the parent/guardian/the candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim. If the prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence of the accused, it could be regarded as an offence involving moral turpitude, disqualification for elective posts or offices under the State or the Union or elections to any local body, legislature or Parliament.

15.As soon as the finding is recorded by the Scrutiny Committee holding that the certificate obtained was false, on its cancellation and confiscation simultaneously, it should be communicated to the educational

institution concerned or the appointing authority by registered post with acknowledgement due with a request to cancel the admission or the appointment. The Principal etc. of the educational institution responsible for making the admission or the appointing authority, should cancel the admission/appointment without any further notice to the candidate and debar the candidate from further study or continue in office in a post.

7. A bare perusal of Para 3, 4 and 5 categorically

reveals as to how to proceed in the matters of verification of

the caste certificate. In sub Para 3, 4 and 5, the procedure

has been laid down. It speaks of constitution of vigilance cell

in each directorate. Sub Para 4 of Para 13 gives constitution

of the Caste Scrutiny Committee.

8. In the instant case, admittedly the Scrutiny

Committee has not been constituted, as directed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri

(supra). The judgment in the case of Kumari Madhuri (supra)

has been followed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court

Court in the case of Smt. Hirdesh Devi (supra).