Ex Ct/Gd Raben Lahkar Force No. ... vs The Union Of India And 4 Ors on 27 May, 2022

[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Gauhati High Court

Ex Ct/Gd Raben Lahkar Force No. ... vs The Union Of India And 4 Ors on 27 May, 2022

Bench: Michael Zothankhuma

                                                                 Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010099692022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/3459/2022

            EX CT/GD RABEN LAHKAR FORCE NO. 041604336
            S/O. JALESWAR LAHKAR, R/O. VILLAGE- HELONA, POST HELONA,
            DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301.
            VERSUS
            THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW
            DELHI, PIN- 110001.
            2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
             CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE
             CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICE COMPLEX
             NEW DELHI
             PIN- 110001.
            3:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
             CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE
             RANGE SBP (TAC RGDA) ODISHA
             PIN- 765001.
            4:THE COMMANDANT
             215 BATTALION
             C.R.P.F.
             POLICE LINE MALAYPUR
             JAMUI
             BIHAR. 811307.

            5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             BAJALI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 781006

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R MAZUMDAR

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
                                                                Page No.# 2/2

                                BEFORE
              HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                  ORDER

27.05.2022 Heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner was removed from service vide order dated 16.02.2021 and his appeal was rejected vide order dated 17.06.2021. The petitioner's grievance is that if there was a doubt on the Caste Certificate of the petitioner, the same should have been decided by a Scrutiny Committee in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Commissioner, Tribal Development, reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241.

Issue Notice returnable in 4 (four) weeks.

Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent nos.1 to 4 while Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent no.5.

List the matter after four weeks.

On the next date, the counsels for the respondents shall inform this Court as to whether the status of the Caste Certificate of the petitioner has been referred to the Scrutiny Committee as provided in the judgment quoted above, i.e. Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra).

Registry to reflect "GA, Assam" in the Cause List.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gauhati High Court