Karnataka High Court
Sri.R.Somashekar vs The Chairman And Deputy Commissioner on 7 March, 2022
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.4790 OF 2022 (GM-CC)
BETWEEN:
SRI.R. SOMASHEKAR
S/O LATE RAMASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
WORKING AS: CSSD ASSISTANT AT ESIC HOSPITAL,
PEENYA, BANGALORE - 560 022,
RESIDENT OF: NO.133, 5TH MAIN,
MARUTHI NAGAR,
NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 072.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KASHINATH J.D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE CHAIRMAN AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
BENGALURU-560 002.
2. HE MEMBER SECRETARY AND JOINT DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
SAMPANGIRAMANAGARA,
BENGALURU-560 027.
3. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
2
TECHNICAL EDUCATION BUILDING,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001.
4. THE TAHSILDAR
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
KANDAYA BHAVANA,
K.G.ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C. JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.12.2021
PASSED BY THE R1 COMMITTEE AS PER ANNEXURE-A AS
ILLEGAL AND ERROR OF JURISDICTION AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri.C.Jagadish, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. Heard Sri.Kashinath.J.D., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.C.Jagadish, learned counsel for respondents. Perused the writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order withdrawing the Caste 3 Certificate i.e., Adi Dravida is without jurisdiction. It is his submission that the petitioner was issued with the Validity Certificate by the District Caste Verification Committee as per Annexure-D. Once the validity certificate is issued, any aggrieved person would have to file an appeal under Section 4(D) of the Karnataka SC/ST and OBC (Reservation in Appointment etc.,) Act 1990 (for short 'the 1990 Act').
4. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 issued notice dated 31.12.2016 (Annexure-H) to enquire into the caste status of the petitioner as Adi-Dravida/ST. The petitioner filed his objections as at Annexure-J dated 30.01.2017. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 without appreciating the legal contentions raised by the petitioner, passed impugned order (Annexure-A).
5. Learned counsel Sri.C.Jagadish, fairly admits that the order passed at Annexure-A dated 22.12.2021 is contrary to the provisions of the 1990 Act and without 4 jurisdiction. He submits that the respondents may be given liberty to initiate appropriate action.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner was issued with Caste Certificate and Validity Certificate by the District Caste Verification Committee as per Annexure-D dated 28.04.2011. If any person is aggrieved by the said validity certificate, it is open for that person to file appeal under Section 4(D) of the 1990 Act. The respondent without resorting to Section 4(D) could not have initiated fresh enquiry with regard to status of the petitioner as SC-Adi-Dravida. The action of the respondent under Annexure-A is wholly without jurisdiction. The above view is supported by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.604/2007 dated 26.11.12. Once the Caste Certificate is issued and validity certificate is issued, the Committee seizes to exercise any power. It becomes functus officio.
7. Hence, for the reasons stated above, impugned order bearing No.f¸ÀPÀC(£À)/eÁ¥À/¹Dgï-212/2016-17 5 dated 22.12.2021 is set aside with liberty to the authorities to take appropriate action if necessary in accordance with law.
Accordingly, writ petition is allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE RKA