20Th September vs Sagar Giri & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2774 UK

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                  AT NAINITAL
                   HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                          AND
                      HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL

                      SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2023
                          20TH SEPTEMBER, 2023
Ram Bahadur Chettri                                             .....Appellant.
                                        Versus

Sagar Giri & others                                             ....Respondents.

Counsel for the Appellant : Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 : Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel.

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)

Leave to Appeal (IA No.01 of 2023)

The present leave to appeal has been preferred by

the appellant, who was the caveator in the writ proceedings

initiated by respondent no.1, challenging the cancellation of

the caste certificate issued to him. The caste certificate had

been cancelled on the compliant of the applicant.

2. In the light of the aforesaid, we are inclined to

grant leave to appeal to the appellant, which is, hereby,

granted.

3. We now turn to the appeal preferred by the

appellant against the judgment rendered by the learned

Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.1681 of 2020, dated

29.08.2023. The learned Single Judge has allowed the said

writ petition since, admittedly, the Committee to Scrutinize

the caste certificate issued to respondent no.1, had not been

constituted in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in

Km. Madhuri Patil & another vs. Addl. Commissioner,

Tribal Development & others, (1994) 6 SCC 241. The

said judgment directed all the States to constituted a

Committee of three officers, namely, (i) an Additional or Joint

Secretary or any officer higher 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 had

intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the

social status certificates. In the case of Scheduled Tribes, the

Research Officer who had intimate knowledge in identifying

the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or groups of tribes or

tribal communities, was required to remain part of the

Committee. The said judgment further directed that 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 procedure to be adopted by the Inspector

was also set out by the Supreme Court in the said judgment.

4. Admittedly, the Committee which scrutinized the

case of respondent no.1, and directed the cancellation of the

caste certificate, consisted of only the District Magistrate,

Dehradun, District Social Welfare Officer, Dehradun, Sub-

Divisional Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, and the

Tehsildar, Rishikesh, District Dehradun. The inquiry required

to be conducted by the Vigilance cell was also not

undertaken.

5. For the aforesaid reasons, we find absolutely no

reason to interfere with the impugned judgment, and in our

view, the cancellation of the caste cancellation issued to

respondent no.1 was rightly quashed.

6. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

7. The re-scrutiny in terms of the judgment of the

Supreme Court in Km. Madhuri (supra) should positively be

undertaken within the next three months.

8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.)

(RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.) Dated: 20th September, 2023 NISHANT