Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Pramod Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2023

Author: Maninder S. Bhatti

Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti

                                                      1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                                           ON THE 8 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                          WRIT PETITION No. 21485 of 2021

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    PRAMOD KUMAR THAKUR S/O SHRI BHAGWAN
                                DAS THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
                                OCCUPATION:    WORKING   AS   PRIVATE
                                ADHARKAAP JAGMOHANDAS WARD NO.11
                                MURWARA     DISTRICT  KATNI  (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    DIVYA THAKUR D/O SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR
                                THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                WORKING     AS     STUDENT    ADHARKAAP
                                JAGMOHANDAS      WARD   NO.11  MURWARA
                                DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    DIVYESH THAKUR S/O SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR
                                THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                WORKING     AS     STUDENT    ADHARKAAP
                                JAGMOHANDAS      WARD   NO.11  MURWARA
                                DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                            .....PETITIONERS
                          (BY SHRI DHEERAJ KUMAR TIWARI - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. THE
                                PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
                                TRIBAL WELFARE VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    DIRECTORATE OF TRIBAL WELFARE/HIGH
                                POWER SCREENING COMMITTEE OF SCHEDULE
                                CAST    WELFARE    DEPARTMENT    THR.
                                DIRECTOR/COMMISSIONER SATPURA BHAWAN
                                BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    COM M ISSIONER/ADDITIONAL COMMISSONER
                                D I V I S I O N DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 2/13/2023
3:54:00 PM
                                                                2
                          4.    COLLECTOR KATNI DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          5.    SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE DISTRICT
                                KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH - PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                                ORDER

The petitioners are assailing the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 contained in Annexure-P/5 by which Sub-Divisional Officer, Katni has declined to issue caste certificate in favour of the petitioners.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners herein belong to tribe "Bahelia" which is a recognized Scheduled Tribe and therefore, in terms of the provisions of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 (Act 28 of 2000), petitioners are entitled for grant of caste certificate, but unfortunately, the application of the petitioners has been turned down by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Katni while taking into consideration the statements made by the petitioners. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the statements made by the petitioners have been misconstrued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Katni and therefore, the caste certificate in terms of the order dated 31.08.2020 passed by the Additional Collector, Katni ought to have been issued to the petitioners.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that as there is dispute as to whether the petitioners belong to "Bahelia" Tribe or not, and therefore, such disputed question of facts cannot be gone into the present petition. It is also contended that the petitioners be relegated to the State Level Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 2/13/2023 3:54:00 PM 3 Committee constituted in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors. reported in AIR 1995 SC 94. Thus, submits that no interference at this stage is warranted.

4. Undisputedly, the petitioners are claiming issuance of caste certificate, hence such issue requires scrutiny and such scrutiny is required to be need done sifting of evidence and said powers are vested with the State High Power Committee constituted pursuant to the directives issued by the Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra).

5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with a direction to the State High Level Committee constituted pursuant to the directives issued by the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) to take decision on the petitioners' grievance as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months. If, ultimately the petitioners are found entitled for grant of certificate of "Bahelia" Tribe, the caste certificate be issued to the petitioners within a further period of 60 days.

6. With the aforesaid, the present petition stands disposed of.

7. It is made clear that the order dated 21.01.2021 passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Katni contained in Annexure-P/5 as well as subsequent order passed by the Commissioner shall not come in way of the High Power Committee to decide the controversy.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE @shish Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 2/13/2023 3:54:00 PM