Karnataka High Court
Somanth H M S/O Late Veeraiah H M vs Deputy Commissioner on 16 September, 2020
Author: S.R. Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R. Krishna Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.114839/2019 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN
1. SOMANTH H M S/O LATE VEERAIAH H M
AGED ABOUT: 54 YEARS,
R/O: NO.301/A, M.P.PRAKASH NAGAR,
HOSAPETE, DIST: BALLARI-583201.
2. SRI.KOUSHIK H M S/O SOMANATH H M
AGED ABOUT: 25 YEARS,
R/O: NO.301/A, M.P.PRAKASH NAGAR,
HOSAPETE, DIST: BALLARI-583201.
3. RACHANA H M D/O SOMANATH H M
AGED ABOUT: 21 YEARS, R/O: NO.301/A,
M.P.PRAKASH NAGAR, HOSAPETE,
DIST: BALLARI-583201.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
MAIN ROAD, BALLARI-583101.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HOSPET SUB DIVISION,
HOSAPETE-583201.
3. THE TAHSILDAR
GRADE II
OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR,
2
HOSAPETE TOWN-583201.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C JAGADISH, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A) WRIT
OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH ANNEXURE D TO D2 PASSED BY
THE RESPONDENT NO 1 HEREIN AT DATED 21-8-19 IN
KUM.JATHI.PARISILINE:382:2018-19 AND B) WRIT OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO
RECONSIDER THE MATTER AFRESH AS PER RECORDS
AVAILABLE AND AFTER HEARING THE PETITIONERS AFTER
LOOKING A LOCAL INSPECTION REPORT FROM THE VILLAGE
ACCOUNTANT HOSPET TALUK DISTRICT BELLARY, VIDE E TO E2
DATED 22-11-18, NECESSARY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Special Counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
2. In this petition, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:
a) Writ of certiorari and quash Annexures-D to D2 passed by the 1st respondent herein dated 21.08.2019 in Kum. Jathi.
Parisiline:382:2018-19.
b) Writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter afresh 3 as per records available and after hearing the petitioners after looking a local inspection report from the Village Accountant, Hospet Taluk, District Ballari vide Annexures-E to E2 dated 22.11.2018 respectively.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 1st respondent/Deputy Commissioner has committed an error in issuing the impugned communication at Annexures-D to D2 dated 21.08.2019 respectively to the CRE Cell for the purpose of adjudication of the revision petition filed by the petitioners. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that by the impugned communication addressed to the Civil Rights Enforcement Cell (CRE Cell), the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner has sought for a validity of report which is beyond scope and ambit of the revisional proceedings before him. In this context, he invites my attention to Section 4-F of the Act as well as Rule 7 of the Rules, in order to contend that the reference to the CRE Cell can be made for the purpose of issuance of validity certificate 4 and not for the purpose of issuance of caste certificate which was the subject matter before the 1st respondent- Deputy Commissioner. It is therefore contended that the impugned communication at Annexures-D to D2 is vitiated and deserves to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned Special Counsel for the respondents would submit that there is no merit in the petition and same deserves to be dismissed.
5. After having given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions, a perusal of the material on record will indicate that the applications submitted by the petitioners for issuance of caste certificate was rejected by the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar by his order dated 14.12.2017. Aggrieved by the rejection of the request for issuance of caste certificate, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent-Assistant Commissioner which was also dismissed by order dated 4.12.2018. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Tahsildar as well as Assistant Commissioner rejecting the 5 request of the petitioners for issuance of caste certificate, the petitioners preferred a revision petition, which is now pending before the Deputy Commissioner. It is not in dispute that the proceedings before the Tahsildar, Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner are only in respect of caste certificate Under Rule3-A of the Rules and not validity certificate under Rule 7 of the Rules.
6. Under these circumstances, the impugned communication issued by the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner referring the matter to the CRE Cell for verification is clearly erroneous, since Rule 7 of the Rules pertains to the validity certificate and not caste certificate which is the subject matter of the instant proceedings is governed by Rule 3-A. Under these circumstances, without going into merits or demerits of the rival contentions and without going into question with regard to entitlement of the petitioners for issuance of caste certificate, the impugned communications dated 6 21.08.2019 at Annexures-D to D2 referring the matter to the CRE Cell are clearly contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules and same deserves to be quashed.
7. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
a) This writ petition is allowed.
b) The impugned communications dated 21.08.2019 at Annexures-D to D2 issued by the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner are hereby quashed.
c) The 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner is directed to conclude the revisional proceedings filed by the petitioners strictly in accordance with Section 4-F of the Act and in the light of the observations made in this order.
d) Subject to the aforesaid directions, petition stands allowed.
SD/-
JUDGE JTR