Bangalore District Court
Beerappa.M vs The Head Master/Principal on 16 November, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-69)
Dated this the 16th day of November 2016
:PRESENT:
Sri.Shivaji Anant Nalawade, B.Com., LL.B.(Spl)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.8975/2015
PLAINTIFF : Beerappa.M
S/o Munibeerappa,
Aged about 41 years,
Residing at No.229,
Narasipura Layout,
Vidyaranyapura,
Bengaluru - 560 097.
(By Sri.Kumara K.B., Advocate)
- Versus -
DEFENDANTS : 1. The Head Master/Principal,
Deva Matha Central School,
Defence Layout, Vidyaranyapura,
Bengaluru - 560 097.
2. The Head Master/Principal,
Air Force School, Jalahalli,
Jalahalli East,
Bengaluru - 560 014.
2 O.S.8975/2015
3. The Head Master,
St.Philomena's English Primary
School, Doddabommasandra,
Vidyaranyapura Main Road,
Bengaluru - 560 097.
4. The Block Education Officer (BEO)
Bengaluru North Division-4,
Bengaluru - 560 064.
5. The Director of Public Instructions
Bengaluru North District,
Kempegowda Road,
Opposite to Cauvery Bhavan,
K.G.Road, Bengaluru - 560 009.
6. The Director of Public Instruction,
Secondary Education,
K.R.Circle, Bengaluru - 560 001.
7. The Director Examination
Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board,
Malleshwaram Circle,
Bengaluru - 560 003.
8. The Secretary
Department of Education,
Government of Karnataka,
M.S.Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
(Defendants No.1, 4, 7 & 8 Exparte
Defendant No.3 by Sri.I.P.,
Advocate)
3 O.S.8975/2015
Date of Institution 29-10-2015
Nature of suit Declaration & Injunction
Date of commencement 08-09-2016
of evidence
Date on which judgment 16-11-2016
was pronounced
Total Duration Years Months Days
1 0 18
JUDGMENT
This is the suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for declaration and consequential relief of direction.
2. The brief facts of the plaintiff's case are as follows:
It is the case of the plaintiff that, he got married to one Smt.Manjula.M and out of his wedlock with Manjula they have got a daughter by name Kum.Megha.B and her daughter born on 20-02-2000. It is the case of the plaintiff that, his daughter Megha.B has been admitted to 1st defendant school as a first standard student on 12-06-2006 and she completed her education of first and second 4 O.S.8975/2015 standard in the defendant No.1-School. It is the case of plaintiff that, his daughter Megha.B joined the third standard in the 2nd defendant school on 11-06-2007 and she continued her education up to 7th standard and thereafter his daughter joined 3rd defendant school on 01- 06-2012 and she completed her education from 8th to 10th Standard at defendant No.3-School at Dodda Bommasandra, Bengaluru. His daughter has completed SSLC examination on first appearance. It is the case of the plaintiff that in all the TC and education records issued and maintained by defendant No.1 to 3 of his daughter's, caste column shown as not applicable. It is the case of the plaintiff that he and his wife belongs to Hindu religion by cast Kuruba. The non-mentioning of the caste of his daughter in the school records was not knowing to him and his wife and he came to know regarding the same first time when he has obtained TC and other education certificates pertaining to his daughter from the 3rd defendant school when she has completed SSLC examination recently and 5 O.S.8975/2015 joined higher education like PUC. It is the case of the plaintiff that after seeing the TC and education records he shocked and surprised that in the school records of his daughter in the caste column 'Not Applicable' is mentioned and caste has not been mentioned as Kuruba. Thereafter, he has also obtained Transfer Certificate from defendant No.1 and 2-Schools and verified the records of defendant No.1 and 2-Schools in respect of his daughter and in those records also in the Caste column of his daughter 'Not Applicable' is mentioned. It is the case of plaintiff that he and his wife belongs to Hindu religion and caste of Kuruba, so his daughter also belongs to Hindu religion of Kuruba caste and in the school records the caste of his daughter is not mentioned as Kuruba and in that column it is mentioned as 'Not Applicable. It is the case of plaintiff that he has obtained the Caste Certificate belongs to his daughter from the Special Tahasildar, Bengaluru North and in the said Caste Certificate his daughter's caste is mentioned as Kuruba community. He and his wife are also 6 O.S.8975/2015 belongs to Kuruba community, so it is necessary to mention the caste of his daughter in the school records as Kuruba caste and he has requested the defendants for entering his daughter's caste in the school records as Kuruba and they have refused to enter the caste, thereafter he has issued legal notice to the defendants and called upon them to enter the caste of his daughter Megha.B in the school records as Kuruba. The defendants have not entered the caste of his daughter in the school records, so he has constrained to file the present suit for declaration that his daughter Megha.B belongs to Kuruba caste and direct the defendants to issue school records, Transfer Certificate and other records pertaining to his daughter by incorporating her caste as Kuruba in the school records.
3. In pursuance of the summons, defendant No.1 appeared through his counsel, defendant No.3 appeared in person, defendant No.1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in spite of service of summons remained absent, hence placed exparte. Defendant No.3 in spite of sufficient opportunity given to 7 O.S.8975/2015 him to file written statement, has not filed written statement, hence it is taken that defendant No.3 has no written statement.
4. Defendant No.2 has filed written statement and contended that the suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable under law and fact. Defendant No.2 has denied the averments made in the plaint. Defendant No.2 has specifically contended that plaintiff's daughter was a student of defendant No.2-school from 11-06-2007 to 31- 03-2012 and had studied from Class-III to Class-VII. Further defendant No.2 has contended that at the time of seeking admission to Class-III of defendant No.2-School, Transfer Certificate issued from Deva Matha Central School was submitted wherein only the religion of the child was mentioned Hindu and 'NA' was mentioned in the Caste column. Plaintiff has submitted application form at the time of admission of his daughter to Class-III in defendant No.2-School, wherein there was no mention of caste at Column No.8. Further defendant has contended that even 8 O.S.8975/2015 after admitting the plaintiff's daughter to Class-III and during the stay in the school for about 5 years the plaintiff nor his family members did not gave any details of caste or get it entered the caste by producing valid Caste Certificate from the competent authority. Further defendant No.2 has contended that, subsequently in the year 2014 plaintiff's daughter has completed Class-VII and was withdrawn from defendant No.2-School. The Transfer Certificate was issued to her as per the details available with the School and as there was no mentioning of her caste in the application form or subsequently neither the plaintiff nor his family members got the caste entered in the school records. The Transfer Certificate was issued mentioning 'NA' in the Caste column of Transfer Certificate. Further defendant No.2 has contended that plaintiff nor his family members raised objection while accepting the Transfer Certificate or produced any document to get the caste entered in the school records and Transfer Certificate as well. Further defendant No.2 has contended that after the Transfer 9 O.S.8975/2015 Certificate was issued in the year 2012, plaintiff approached the School administration in the year 2015 to get the caste entered in the Transfer Certificate, by which time as the copy was already issued in the year 2012 itself, no change in caste can be incorporated from or entertained as per the Rules which was revealed to the plaintiff. Further defendant No.2 has contended that plaintiff has failed to get the records entered/corrected during the relevant point of time when his daughter was pursuing her studies in defendant No.2-School till 2012, cannot be permitted after a lapse of 4 years to get it entered in the Transfer Certificate which was issued on the basis of the information furnished by the plaintiff at the time of admitting his daughter to the school, as such the suit is bad under law and liable to be dismissed. Further defendant No.2 has contended that defendant No.2-School is an education institution being run by strictly following the rules and regulations and plaintiff having failed to furnish the relevant information at the time of admitting 10 O.S.8975/2015 his daughter into the school or before the student was withdrawn from the school, cannot be permitted to lay a claim in respect of the same at this stage and as such the above suit is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed and prayed for dismissing the suit.
5. On the basis of the above pleadings, following issues are framed:
ISSUES
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that his daughter 'Megha.B' belongs to Kuruba caste?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that in the Transfer Certificate and education records in his daughter's caste column, it is shown as 'Not Applicable'?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled direction as sought for?
4. What Order/Decree?
6. Plaintiff in order to prove his case, examined himself as PW.1. Plaintiff in support of his case produced 27 documents and got them marked as Ex.P1 to 27 and closed his side. Defendant No.2 in order to prove its case 11 O.S.8975/2015 examined its authorized Signatory as DW.1 and defendant No.2 has produced 4 documents and got them marked as Ex.D1 to 4 and closed its side.
7. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiff and learned counsel for the defendant No.2in length.
8. Perused the oral and documentary evidence placed before me. My findings to the above issues are as follows:
ISSUE NO.1 : Does not survive for consideration; ISSUE NO.2 : Does not survive for consideration;
ISSUE NO.3 : In the NEGATIVE;
ISSUE NO.4 : In the NEGATIVE;
ISSUE NO.5 : As per final order
For the following;
REASONS
8. ISSUE NO.1 AND 2: The above issues are
connected, hence I have taken-up these issues together for my consideration.12 O.S.8975/2015
9. It is the case of plaintiff that he belongs to Hindu Kuruba caste and his wife also belongs to Hindu Kuruba caste. His daughter's name is Megha.B. His daughter born on 20-02-2000. His daughter has been admitted with the defendant No.1-School to the 1st Standard on 12-06-2006 and she has completed her first and second standard education with the defendant No.1- School. Thereafter his daughter has joined 2nd defendant School for 3rd Standard and she continued there up to 7th Standard. On 01-06-2012 she joined the 3rd defendant school and she has completed her education from VIII to X Standard at defendant No.3-School. It is the case of plaintiff that he has obtained the Transfer Certificate and educational records issued by the defendant No.1 to 3- School and he came to know that in the Transfer Certificate in the Caste column it is mentioned that 'Not Applicable', he and his wife belongs to Kuruba community and their daughter also belongs to Kuruba community and through oversight in the school records the caste of his daughter is 13 O.S.8975/2015 not mentioned and in the caste column it is mentioned as 'Not Applicable' and when he came to know regarding the same, he has given requisition to the defendant for entering the caste of his daughter in the school records as Hindu Kuruba caste and defendants have refused to enter, thereafter he has issued legal notice and in spite of it defendants have not mentioned the caste of his daughter in the school records as Hindu Kuruba, so he has constrained to file the present suit.
10. Defendant No.2 has filed written statement and denied the averments of the plaint. It is the contention of the defendant No.2-School that the daughter of the plaintiff Megha.B admitted to their school for 2nd Standard and in the Transfer Certificate of the daughter of plaintiff in the caste column it is mentioned that 'Not Applicable' and the same has been continued in their school. In the application form also the plaintiff and his wife have not mentioned the caste of their daughter as Hindu Kuruba. The daughter of plaintiff has left their school 4 years back 14 O.S.8975/2015 and they have also issued the Transfer Certificate and now the school records cannot be changed and they have intimated regarding the same to the plaintiff. Plaintiff is not entitled for declaration and direction as sought. The suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable under law and prayed for dismissal of the suit.
11. Plaintiff in order to prove his case, examined himself as PW.1 and PW.1 has reiterated the averments of the plaint in his examination-in-chief. The counsel for the defendant No.2 has cross-examined PW.1 and nothing has been made out in his cross-examination so as to disbelieve his evidence. Plaintiff in support of his case has produced Transfer Certificate issued by the Principal, Deva Matha Central School belongs to his daughter which is at Ex.P1 and in Ex.P1 in Column No.11 which is caste column it is mentioned as 'Not Applicable'. Further plaintiff has produced the Transfer Certificate issued by defendant No.2- School which is at Ex.P2 and in Column No.5 it is mentioned that 'Not Applicable'. Further plaintiff has 15 O.S.8975/2015 produced Transfer Certificate issued by defendant No.3- School which is at Ex.P3 and in Ex.P3 also in Column No.5 caste is mentioned as 'Not Applicable'. Plaintiff has produced office copy of legal notice issued by him to the defendants which is at Ex.P4. Plaintiff has produced the Postal receipts for issue of notice to the defendants and they are at Ex.P5 to 12. Plaintiff has produced 6 Acknowledgement Cards for receipt of Notice to the defendants and they are at Ex.P13 to 18. Plaintiff has produced two endorsements produced by the Post Office to show that Notice issued to defendant No.4 is served and they are at Ex.P19 and 20. Plaintiff has produced Reply Notices given by defendant No.1, 2 and 5 to Ex.P4-Notice which are at Ex.P21 to 23. Plaintiff has produced Caste Certificate of his daughter issued by Special Tahasildar, Bengaluru North, which is at Ex.P24. Plaintiff has produced Caste Certificate belongs to him issued by the Special Tahasildar, Bengaluru North which is at Ex.P25. Plaintiff has produced his election I.D. Card which is at 16 O.S.8975/2015 Ex.P26. Plaintiff has produced his attested copy of Transfer Certificate which is at Ex.P27.
12. Defendant No.2 in order to prove its case, examined the office-in-charge of defendant No.2-School and authorized signatory of defendant No.2-School one Pallavi Ponnappa examined as DW.1 and DW.1 has reiterated the averments of written statement filed by the defendant No.2 in her examination-in-chief. The counsel for the plaintiff has cross-examined DW.1 and nothing has been made out in her cross-examination.
13. Defendant No.2 has produced application given by the plaintiff at the time of admitting his daughter Megha.B to the School which is at Ex.D1. In the application in Column No.7 which is the religion column, 'Hindu' is mentioned and Column No.8 is vacant. Defendant No.2 has produced Transfer Certificate of plaintiff's daughter issued by defendant No.1-School at the time of admitting the plaintiff's daughter to their school which is at Ex.D2 17 O.S.8975/2015 and Ex.D2 discloses that in Column No.7, 'Not Applicable' is mentioned. Defendant No.2 has produced copy of Transfer Certificate issued by them to the daughter of plaintiff which is at Ex.D3 and in Ex.D3 also in Column No.5 'Not Applicable' is mentioned. Defendant No.2 has produced legal notice given by them to Ex.P4-Notice which is at Ex.D4.
14. The counsel for defendant No.2 at the time of advancing arguments submitted that the suit filed by the present plaintiff for declaring his caste as Kuruba and seeking direction to incorporate the caste of his daughter Megha.B as Kuruba in the school records is not maintainable. The counsel for the defendant in support of his contention relied upon citation of our own Hon'ble High Court reported in 2014 ILR 5389 KAR (Case: The Government of Karnataka Vs. Kumari Shilpa Shrishail), wherein the lordship of our Hon'ble High Court have clearly held that, suit for declaration and consequential relief of direction to change the caste in case of Karnataka Schedule 18 O.S.8975/2015 Caste, Schedule Tribes and Other Backward Classes is not maintainable and the suit is hit by Sec.9 of C.P.C. Further the lordship in the said citation have observed that "as per the provisions of Karnataka Schedule Caste, Schedule Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments Etc.) Act, 1990, a Committee is constituted to verify the income and caste. The said Act has stood amended by Act No.27 of 1997, which received the assent on 29-09-1997. As per Section 4-A, 4-B, 4-C and 4-D have been inserted to Section 4 by virtue of Act 27 of 1997. As per Section 4, a Caste Verification Committee is constituted in all the Districts to verify the caste and also the income. Deputy Commissioner of the District will be the Ex-officio Chairman and Deputy Secretary (Administration ZP) and Tahsildar of Taluk will be the members and District Welfare Officers will be the Member Secretaries. As per Section 3(A) of the said Act, an application will have to be made to the Tahasildar who will verify the information, documents and such other materials furnished by the applicant and such verification if 19 O.S.8975/2015 he is satisfied with the correctness of the information, doducments and evidence furnished by the applicant, he will issue a Caste Certificate or Income Certificate in Forms D, E or F. An Appeal is provided under Sec.4(A) to the Assistant Commissioner. Rules have been framed in this regard and they have come into effect from 08-02-2000 vide gazette Notification bearing No.SWD 132 SAD 97."
15. So when a specific mechanism is provided under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments Etc.) Act, 1990, the Civil Courts jurisdiction is impliedly barred, more particularly, in the light an appeal being provided under Sec.4(B) against an order passed under Sec.4(A) by the Tahasildar regarding issuance of Caste Certificate and Income Certificate. So the present suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable. Plaintiff is not entitled for declaration and direction as sought for. As the suit is not maintainable, this court has no jurisdiction to answer issue No.1 and 2, so issue No.1 and 2 will not survive for 20 O.S.8975/2015 consideration. Hence, I answered issue No.1 and 2 as does not survive for consideration.
16. ISSUE NO.3 AND 4: As this court has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit, the plaintiff is not entitled for declaration and direction sought for. Hence, I answered issue No.3 and 4 in the NEGATIVE.
17. ISSUE No.5: In view of my findings on issue Nos.1 to 4 and reasons stated therein, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is dismissed. Plaintiff is at liberty to approach the concerned authority for redressal of his grievances and in such an event the authorities shall expedite the matter without undue delay.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16th day of November, 2016).
(SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.21 O.S.8975/2015
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF:
PW.1 Beerappa.M 21-07-2016 DOCUMENTS MARKED IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF:
Ex.P1 Copy of Transfer Certificate Ex.P2 Copy of Transfer Certificate Ex.P3 Copy of Transfer Certificate Ex.P4 Legal Notice Ex.P5 to 12 Postal receipts Ex.P13 to 18 Postal acknowledgements Ex.P19, 20 Two endorsement issued by the Post Office Ex.P21 to 23 Reply Notice of defendant No.1, 2 and 5 Ex.P24 Caste Certificate Ex.P25 Caste Certificate of plaintiff Ex.P26 Copy of Voter's I.D. Card Ex.P27 Transfer Certificate
WITNESSES EXAMINED IN FAVOUR OF THE DEFENDANT:
PW.1 Pallavi Ponnappa 08-09-2016 DOCUMENTS MARKED IN FAVOUR OF THE DEFENDANT:
Ex.D1 Application
22 O.S.8975/2015
Ex.D2 Transfer Certificate
Ex.D3 Certified copy of Transfer
Certificate
Ex.D4 Copy of Reply Notice
(SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru City.