Karnataka High Court
B R Adithya vs State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2024
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:9616
WP No. 6923 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No. 6923 OF 2024 (GM-CC)
BETWEEN:
1. B. R. ADITHYA,
S/O B. V. RAMA MOHANA,
AGED 17 YEARS, MINOR,
RESIDING AT BRAHMANAKODU,
NARASEEPURA VILLAGE,
KOPPA TALUK, CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 577126.
2. B. R. ARYAN,
S/O B. V. RAMA MOHANA,
AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, MINOR,
RESIDING AT BRAHMANAKODU,
NARASEEPURA VILLAGE,
KOPPA TALUK,
CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT,
Digitally signed by KARNATAKA - 577126.
NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF SINCE PETITIONER Nos. 1 AND 2
KARNATAKA ARE MINORS, THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY
THEIR FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
B. V. RAMA MOHANA,
S/O LATE K. VEKATRAMANAIAH,
AGED 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BRHAMNAKODU,
NARASEEPURA VILLAGE,
KOPPA TALUK, CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 577126.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI P.N. MANMOHAN, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:9616
WP No. 6923 of 2024
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT
(TRIBAL WELFARE),
VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. TAHSILDAR,
KASABA HOBLI, KOPPA TALUK,
CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 577126.
3. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY,
FIRST FLOOR, NSIC-MDBP BUILDING,
OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
NEW DELHI - 110020,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON,
4. KARNATAKA EXAMINATION AUTHORITY,
18TH CROSS ROAD, SAMPIGE ROAD,
MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA - 560012,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAHUL CARIAPPA, K.S., AGA FOR R1;
SRI C. JAGADEESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 13.01.2024 ISSUED BY
THE R2 TO THE P1 (PRODUCED ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION
AS ANNEXURE-J). QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED
13.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE R2 TO THE P2 (PRODUCED ALONG
WITH THE WRIT PETITION AS ANNEXURE-K). DIRECTING THE
R2 TO ISSUE CASTE CERTIFICATE TO P1 AND 2 AS
BELONGING TO MALERU-SCHEDULED TRIBE. DIRECTING THE
R4 TO CONSIDER THE RESERVATION CATEGORY OF THE P1
FOR THE PURPOSE OF UG CET 2024 EXAM AS MALERU-
SCHEDULED TRIBE. DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:9616
WP No. 6923 of 2024
APPLICATION DATED 28.12.2023(PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE
WRIT PETITION AS ANNEXURE-B) AND REPRESENTATION
DATED 29.01.2024 (PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE WRIT
PETITION AS ANNEXURE-L) FILED ON BEHALF OF P1 AND 2.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following reliefs:
"I. Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 13.01.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent to the 1st petitioner (produced along with the Writ Petition as Annexure - J);
II. Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 13.01.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent to the 2nd petitioner (produced along with the writ petition as Annexure - K);
III. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to issue caste certificate to petitioners No.1 and 2 as belonging to "Maleru- Scheduled Tribe";
IV. Consequently, issue a writ of
th
mandamus directing the 4 respondent to
consider the reservation category of the 1st petitioner for the purposes of UG CET 2014 exam as Maleru - Scheduled Tribe;
V. Issue a writ of mandamus directing nd the 2 respondent to consider the application dated 28.12.2023 (produced along with the writ petition as Annexure - B) and representation dated 29.01.2024 (produced along with the writ -4- NC: 2024:KHC:9616 WP No. 6923 of 2024 petition as Annexure - L ) filed on behalf of petitioner Nos.1 and 2; and VI. Pass such other and further orders as deemed fit in light of the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The petitioner No.1 is an aspirant to be a part of the under graduate NEET Examination 2024, which is stated to be held on 09.03.2024. For the said purpose, the petitioner No.1 applies for a caste certificate depicting her to be belonging to 'Maleru' caste. The application is turned down by the impugned endorsement by the Tahsildar on 13.01.2024 holding that the petitioner has not furnished, any documents in support of the claim that she belongs to Maleru caste a Scheduled Tribe, and further indicates that even after communication to produce the documents, the petitioner has not produced.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner has plethora of documents in his possession to demonstrate that he belongs to Maleru caste - Scheduled Tribe, and would submit that if only an -5- NC: 2024:KHC:9616 WP No. 6923 of 2024 opportunity had been given by the Tahsildar, they would have produced everything before the Tahsildar and the Tahsildar would have issued a caste certificate as sought for. Since no opportunity of the kind is granted, the endorsement is in violation of principles of natural justice.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents Sri C. Jagadeesh would submit that the burden lies on the petitioners to demonstrate that he belong to a particular caste, which he claims to i.e., Maleru. Learned counsel representing respondent No.2 would vehemently refute the submissions and contend that the petitioners do not belong to Scheduled Tribe i.e., Maleru. They are Maleru, which is not a Scheduled Tribe and no fault can be found with the endorsement so issued by the Tahsildar on 13.01.2024.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the available material on record. -6-
NC: 2024:KHC:9616 WP No. 6923 of 2024
6. The issue is whether the petitioners were afforded opportunity of hearing. The endorsement does not indicate any opportunity of hearing given to the petitioners, for submission of any of the records. What is recorded is that the petitioners have not produced any documents in support of their claim.
7. The writ petition appends plethora of documents, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioners is in support of their claim. Therefore, on this short ground that, no opportunity to produce the documents before the Tahsildar was afforded, the endorsement is rendered unsustainable. Therefore, the Tahsildar shall now reconsider the application submitted by the petitioners for issuance of a caste certificate. It is needless to observe that the petitioners shall place on record all the documents that are in their possession, in support of their claim, before the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar, then shall consider the same and pass necessary orders in accordance with law.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:9616 WP No. 6923 of 2024
8. For the aforesaid reasons:
ORDER
1. The writ petition is allowed-in-part.
2. Endorsements dated 13.01.2024, stands quashed.
3. The matter is remitted back to the hands of the Tahsildar, to consider the application/representation of the petitioners, afresh and pass necessary orders bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4