Karnataka High Court
J Basavaraju vs Deputy General Manager (Imm) on 1 June, 2012
Author: H N Nagamohan Das
Bench: H.N. Nagamohan Das
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JUNE, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS
W.P.No.14600/2008(S-RES)
BETWEEN:
J.BASAVARAJU
S/O JAVARAIAH (LATE)
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
WORKING AS CHIEF SUPERVISOR (SCALE-10)
PURCHASE DEPARTMENT
ENGINE DIVISION
HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED
BANGLAORE COMPLEX
BANGALORE-560 093.
..PETITIONER
(By SRI J PRASHANTH, ADV.)
AND:
1. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(IMM)
& DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
ENGINE DIVISION
HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED
POST BAG NO.9310
BANGALORE-560 093.
2. THE CHAIRMAN
& DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT
BANGALORE.
2
3. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
GENERAL OF POLICE
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
ENFORCEMENT CELL
BANGALORE. .RESPONDENTS
(By SRI S.V.SHASTRI, ADV. FOR R1
SRI C.JAGADEESH, ADV. FOR R2-R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED U/A 226 & 227 OF
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14.11.2008 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
This petition coming on for hearing, this day, the court made the
following;
ORDER
In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the show cause notice dated 14.11.2008, Annexure-A issued by the first respondent, the proposal sent by the third respondent dated 6.11.2008, Annexure-B and the order dated 15.6.2005, Annexure-D passed by the second respondent.
2. Petitioner by producing a caste certificate as Kadukuruba secured employment as Messenger in the first respondent company claiming reservation under scheduled tribe category as early as in the year 1977. The second respondent on 3 coming to know that petitioner secured employment by producing a false caste certificate initiated proceedings to verify the caste certificate of the petitioner. At the instance of second respondent the third respondent investigated the matter and submitted a report on 19.1.2001.The second respondent committee, by accepting the report of the third respondent passed the impugned order dated15.6.2005 as per Annexure-D cancelling the certificate obtained by the petitioner as Kadukuruba and declared that he belongs to Kuruba community. Based on this order at Annexure-D, the third respondent sent a proposal to the first respondent on 6.11.2008 as per Annexure-B to remove the petitioner from the service. On the basis of this proposal at Annexure-B, the first respondent has issued the impugned show cause notice on 14.11.2008 as per Annexure-A to the petitioner to show cause as to why he could not be removed from service. Aggrieved by the impugned show cause notice, Annexure-A, the proposal at Annexure-B and the order at Annexure-D, the petitioner is before this court.
3. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.
4
4. It is not in dispute that petitioner secured caste certificate on 21.7.1977 from the jurisdictional Tahsildar stating that he belongs to Kadukuruba community which is classified as scheduled tribe. By producing this caste certificate, petitioner secured employment in the first respondent company. On the controversy regarding the verification of the caste certificate, a Division Bench of this court held that committee constituted under the Karnataka Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes (reservation of appointments etc) Act, 1990 is not competent to investigate and verify the caste certificate issued prior to the Act came into force in 1991. Admittedly the caste certificate of petitioner was of the year 1977. Therefore, the impugned order at Annexure-D dated 15.6.2005 is without jurisdiction and on this ground the same is liable to be quashed. Now the Government of Karnataka had issued a notification on 6.5.2009 constituting a State level committee to verify the caste certificate issued prior to the coming into force of the Act. It is open for the first respondent employer to approach the State Caste Verification Committee to verify the caste certificate produced by the petitioner.
5. Section 7A of the Rules specifies that the Director of Civil Rights Enforcement is entitled to take steps to prosecute such of the persons who have obtained false caste certificate. Subsequently, the Government of Karnataka by its notification dated 5 25.4.2002 directed not to initiate any prosecution proceedings in respect of caste certificate of certain communities. One such community is Kadukuruba. Therefore, the third respondent is not entitled to initiate any prosecution proceedings against the petitioner. Further, this Government Order specifies that the appointment secured by producing a false certificate as Kadukuruba shall not be distributed and such employees are to be treated as General Category employees. Neither in the Act nor in the Rules or in the Government order it is specified that the third respondent is competent to recommend the case of an employee for termination on the ground that he has secured employment on false certificate. In the absence of any such power the impugned recommendation Annexure-B dated 6.11.2008 issued by the third respondent to terminate the petitioner from service is without any competency and authority. On this ground the impugned order at Annexure-B is liable to be quashed.
6. The first respondent who is the employer of petitioner based on the order at Annexure-D and the proposal at Annexure-B has issued the impugned show cause notice to the petitioner per Annexure-A. Since the order at Annexure-D and the proposal at Annexure-B are to be quashed, the show cause notice at Annexure-A is also to be quashed.
6For the reasons stated above, the following:
ORDER
i) Writ petition is hereby allowed.
ii) The impugned show cause notice dated 14.11.2008, Annexure-A, the proposal sent by the third respondent dated 6.11.2008, Annexure-B and the order dated 15.6.2005, Annexure-D passed by the second respondent are hereby quashed.
iii) It is open for the first respondent to approach the State Level Caste Verification Committee constituted under the Government Order dated 6.5.2009 with regard to the caste certificate produced by the petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
DKB