Sri T L Sreedhara vs The Superintendent Of Police on 14 February, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri T L Sreedhara vs The Superintendent Of Police on 14 February, 2019

Bench: Alok Aradhe

                              1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

                         BEFORE
       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

   WRIT PETITION NOs.38693-97 OF 2016 (GM-CC)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI T L SREEDHARA
   AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
   S/O SRI LAXMINARAYANANIAH
   SUB-DEVISIONAL ENGINEER (SDE)
   BSNL HASSAN - 573201.

2. SMT. NAGARATHANA
   W/O SRI T L SREEDHARA
   AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
   SENIOR TELECOM OFFICER
   BSNL HASSAN - 573201.

3. SMT SWARNALATHA
   D/O SRI H.B. VASUDEVAIAH
   AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
   SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
   BSNL HASSAN - 573201.

4. SRI M A SATEESH
   S/O SRI M.G. ANANTHAIAH
   AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
   SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
   BSNL HASSAN - 573201.

5. SRI H.S. RAMASWAMY
   S/O SRI H.G. SESHADRI
   AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
   ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
   BSNL TUMKUR - 572101.             ... PETITIONERS

(By Mr. KESHAVA BHAT A., ADV.)
                               2



AND:

1.     THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
       CRE CELL NO.42/A VINAY MARG
       SIDDARTHANAGAR MYSORE-57011.

2.     THE DEPUTY SUPTD. OF POLICE
       CRE CELL F BLOCK II FLOOR
       CAUVERY BHAVAN K G ROAD
       BANGALORE - 560009.                   ... RESPONDENTS

(By Mr. C. JAGADISH SPL. COUNSEL )
                            ---

      These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and
226 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the
records pertaining to from the file of R-1 and also the entire
records pertaining from the file of the R-2 and on perusal of
the same and etc.

       These Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in
'B' group this day, the Court made the following:-

                          ORDER

Sri.Keshava Bhat A., learned counsel for the petitioners.

Sri.C.Jagadish, Special counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitions are admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.

3. In these petitions, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside all the notices made there in No.Sa.Javi/44/CRE CELL/My/16 dated 29.06.2016 vide Annexures-M, N, P and Q issued by the first respondent and also the impugned notice issued by the second respondent dated 13.06.2016 in No.Javi/39/SP/BC/CRE CELL/2014 vide Annexure-R

(ii) Issue consequential writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from proceeding with the enquiry as contemplated in the impugned notice till the entire dispute is resolved by the Government as contemplated in their own orders.

(iii) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice."

4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners belong to a community called Maleru which is a 4 community notified as Scheduled Tribe community in the Presidential notification. It is further submitted that petitioners are employees of Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited and have joined services in the years 1981, 1982, 1983 and 1997. It is also submitted that respondents have issued a notice to the petitioners on 13.06.2016 and 29.06.2016 in which it is stated that they belong to Maaleru community and they have obtained certificate belonging to Maleru community and the petitioners were required to participate in the enquiry. It is submitted that the respondents have no authority inter alia to issue the impugned notice to the petitioners. On the other hand, learned Special counsel for the respondents has relied on an order dated 16.01.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.14144/2008 and submits that the writ petitions be disposed of in the same terms.

5. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the record. From perusal 5 of the record, it is evident that the State Government, by a communication dated 23.01.1986, has constituted a Committee to go into the issues relating to Maleru and Maaleru, Kadu Kuruba, Jenu Kuruba and Kuruba communities to enable the State Government to make suitable recommendations to the Government of India. Thereafter, the Government of Karnataka has issued another order dated 11.03.2002 as well as an order dated 25.06.2009. In the instant case, the respondents have issued a notice to the petitioners to verify whether the caste certificate supplied on the petitioners had been validly issued or not. In view of the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment etc.) Act, 1990, and the Rules framed thereunder. The respondents have no authority to cancel the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioners. At best, the aforesaid officers can conduct an enquiry, collect the information and submit a report to the Committee constituted under the aforesaid Act, namely, District 6 Caste Verification Committee. The said Committee, on careful scrutiny of the report, if so advised, may initiate the proceeding. Needless to state that it would be open to the petitioners to raise all the objections in the enquiry as well as the proceeding which may be instituted against them by the District Caste Verification Committee including the various orders passed by the State Government from time to time. The said Committee shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the parties and shall pass a speaking order in this regard.

Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE RV

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court