Karnataka High Court
Siddappa And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 31 March, 2022
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO.200748 OF 2022 (GM-CC)
BETWEEN
1. SIDDAPPA S/O PHAKIRAPPA
AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O TENNIHALLI,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA.
2. RAGHAVENDRA
S/O SIDDAPPA TALAWAR
AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O TENNIHALLI,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. HEMA L. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH UNDER SECRETARY-2
SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-01.
2
3. THE TAHSILDAR, INDI,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VIAJAYAPURA-586209.
4. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR
INDI, TQ.INDI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586209.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI C. JAGADISH, SPECIAL COUNSEL)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Smt.Hema L. Kulkarni, learned counsel for petitioners has appeared in person and Sri C.Jagadish, learned Special counsel for respondents has appeared through video conferencing.
Though this writ petition is listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final hearing. 3
2. Heard Smt. Hema L. Kulkarni, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri C.Jagadish, learned Special Counsel appearing for respondents - State.
3. The petitioners have challenged the Circular dated 06.06.2020 issued by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-C stating that respondent No.2, while issuing impugned Circular at Annexure-C, interpreted the amendment to the Constitution at Annexure-A by saying that the benefits of the Scheduled Tribes may be extended to Naikda, Nayaka, Cholival Nayaka, Kapadia Nayaka, Mota Nayaka, Nana Nayaka, Naik, Nayak, Beda, Bedar, Valmiki and Parivara and Talawara of same caste. However, amendment to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order 1950, has added Parivara and Talawara in Column No.38 along with Naik Naikda. In that view of the matter, the petitioners have submitted that injustice has been caused to the petitioners who belong to Talawara community.
4. Sri C. Jagadish, learned Special Counsel appearing for respondents - State contended that there is 4 no impediment for accepting Talawara as a caste in the Scheduled Tribes.
It is also submitted that new Circular has been issued by the Government on 29.01.2022 extending the benefit to the Talawara community also. However, he contended that the case of the petitioners has to be considered in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another vs. Addl., Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others reported in AIR 1995 SC 94.
5. Refuting the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already been declared as they belongs to Talawara community and therefore, there is no necessity to redo the said exercise by the authorities. Accordingly, she submitted that the writ petition be allowed.
5
6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ papers, the same would indicate that the petitioners belong to Talawara community and are entitled for the benefits in terms of the Karnataka SC/ST & Other BC (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990. In addition to this, as rightly contended by Sri C.Jagadish learned Special Counsel for the respondents, Circular dated 29.01.2022 is issued by the Government amending The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2020, wherein Talawara community is also included in the said Amendment Act, 2020.
In that view of the matter, writ petition is disposed of. The petitioners are also entitled for the benefit as is mentioned in Circular No.SWD 180 SAD 2020(P) dated 29.01.2022. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already been declared as they belong to Talawara Community, it is open for the respondents - State to consider the case of 6 the petitioners in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case supra. In view of new Circular dated 29.01.2022, the impugned endorsements issued by the third respondent vide Annexures-'F' and 'F1' both dated 16.02.2022 are quashed and as such, the Tahsildar - respondent No.3 shall issue caste certificate in favour of the petitioners in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Srt