Karnataka High Court
B.A. Kagali And Anr. vs The Secretary, Department Of Social ... on 20 June, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2006(5)KARLJ453, 2005 AIR - KANT. H. C. R. 2218, (2006) 5 KANT LJ 453 (2005) 3 KCCR 2005, (2005) 3 KCCR 2005
Author: V. Jagannathan
Bench: V. Jagannathan
JUDGMENT S.R. Nayak, J.
1. In these two writ appeals the correctness of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17th April, 2003 in W.P. No. 24736 of 2001 and W.P. Nos. 24395 and 24396 of 2000 is assailed. The sixth respondent herein, viz., Smt. Ramani is the writ petitioner in W.P. No. 24736 of 2001. Smt. Ramani is a 'Kuruba' by caste born outside Coorg District. In the year 1977, she was married to one H.T. Devaraj, a kuruba by birth, residing at Dechoor, Madikeri in Coorg District. In terms of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, the husband of Smt. Ramani is a Scheduled Tribe on account of the being a 'Kuruba' from Coorg District.
There is no controversy between the parties that the husband of Smt. Ramani and two children bom out of the wedlock belong to Scheduled Tribe in terms of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. In the year 1981 Smt. Ramani applied to the Tahsildar, Madikeri, for a certificate to the effect that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe she being a 'Kuruba' and resident of Coorg District. The Tahsildar after due verification of the facts issued a certificate dated 14-3-1981, certifying that Smt. Ramani belongs to Scheduled Tribe under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. When the matter stood thus, Smt. Ramani applied to the post of lecturer in Physics in the general merit category in response to an advertisement issued by the Bangalore University in the year 1983. After the selection process she was selected and appointed to the post of lecturer in Physics in the general merit category and she accordingly joined the service in the year 1983. When she was serving as a lecturer in Physics in the University, the Bangalore University called for applications to fill up a post of Reader in Physics reserved for Scheduled Tribe category by way of direct recruitment. Smt. Ramani applied for the said post and she was appointed as Reader in Physics against the Scheduled Tribe quota with effect from 20th February, 1989. Subsequently, Smt. Ramani was appointed to the post of Professor of Physics by way of promotion with effect from 14-11-1997.
2. The trouble started in the year 1998 when Smt. Ramani was selected for Professor's post in selection grade and the Syndicate which confirmed the said appointment, however, referred the issue relating to caste status of Smt. Ramani to the Caste Verification Committee, Coorg District. The Caste Verification Committee, by its proceedings dated 3-6-1999, has opined that Smt. Ramani is not entitled to the caste certificate claimed by her. Being aggrieved by the said proceedings of the Caste Verification Committee Smt. Ramani preferred an appeal to the Divisional Commissioner, Mysore who dismissed that appeal by order dated 25-10-1989. When the matter stood thus, the appellants herein filed W.P. Nos. 24395 and 24396 of 2000 praying for a writ of mandamus to respondents 1 to 5 therein to initiate action and prosecute Smt. Ramani as per the provisions of Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990 and Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 1997. During the pendency of these two writ petitions, the Tahsildar, Madikeri, placing reliance on the order of the Caste Verification Committee dated 3-6-1999 and that of the Divisional Commissioner, Mysore, dated 25-10-1999, without notice to Smt. Ramani, passed an order on 11-6-2001 cancelling the Caste Certificate earlier issued to her. Smt. Ramani being aggrieved by the said order of the Tahsildar dated 11-6-2001 preferred W.P. No. 24736 of 2001. In the said writ petition Smt. Ramani has also assailed the validity of the order of the Caste Verification Committee dated 3-6-1999 and that of the Divisional Commissioner, Mysore dated 25-10-1999. The two writ petitions filed by the appellants herein and the writ petition filed by Smt. Ramani were clubbed and heard together. In the course of hearing, it appears that Smt. Ramani on 7-8-2001 filed an affidavit in the Court undertaking that she would not claim Scheduled Tribe status in future.
3. Learned Single Judge who clubbed all the three writ petitions heard them together and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants herein and allowed the writ petition filed by Smt. Ramani. Hence, these writ appeals.
4. We have heard Sri Pramod , Kathavi, learned Counsel for the appellants, Sri B.V. Acharya, learned Senior Counsel for Smt. Ramani and Sri Deshrai, leamed Government Advocate. It was strenuously contended by Sri Pramod that since Smt. Ramani has chosen to file an affidavit on 7-8-2001 undertaking not to claim Scheduled Tribe status in future, that fact itself would show that she does not belong to Scheduled Tribe and therefore, the appointment secured and promotion earned by her in the course of her official career are invalid and illegal and the learned Single Judge ought to have granted the relief sought for by his clients. Attacking the order of the learned Single Judge insofar as he has allowed the writ petition of Smt. Ramani, Sri Pramod would contend that since Smt. Ramani has had opportunity to represent her case before the Caste Verification Committee and Divisional Commissioner, Mysore, the learned Single Judge ought not to have quashed the order of the Tahsildar dated 11-6-2001 on the ground that there was violation of principles of natural justice. In other words, according to Sri Pramod, Smt. Ramani had participated in the proceedings before the Caste Verification Committee and Divisional Commissioner and therefore, providing hearing again before the Tahsildar was not necessary.
5. Sri B.V. Acharya, learned Senior Counsel, per contra, at the threshold, would narrate the circumstances under which Smt. Ramani had to file an affidavit before the learned Single Judge undertaking not to claim Scheduled Tribes status in future. According to Sri B.V. Acharya, the said proposal came from the Court as a matter of settlement and at that point of time since Smt. Ramani was not aspiring for any better status in the hierarchy of teaching posts in Bangalore University and she was contended, she thought it expedient to file such an affidavit in order to free herself from vexatious litigations initiated by her adversaries. Sri Acharya would point out that the affidavit filed by Smt. Ramani, however, is without prejudice to her contentions and claims.
6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties for considerable time, we do not find any substance or weighty reason or ground to Interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The facts are quite clear and straightforward. In terms of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, a Kuruba in order to claim the status of Scheduled Tribe should establish that he or she is a resident of Coorg District. It is true that Smt. Ramani before her marriage was not a resident of Coorg District. But, admittedly, on 19-8-1977, she married to Sri Devaraj, a Kuruba by birth and a permanent resident of Coorg District. Admittedly, out of the marriage between the two, two children were born and husband of Smt. Ramani and the said two children are treated as persons belonging to Scheduled Tribe.
7. The only short question that falls for decision is whether Smt. Ramani having married a Kuruba in Coorg District in the year 1977, by the time she secured appointment as a lecturer in Physics in Bangalore University with effect from 19-5-1983, had acquired the status of Scheduled Tribe by residence. This question need not detain us for long. Smt. Ramani having married Sri Devaraj as far back as in the year 1977 and having spent the entire period between 1977 and 1983 in the matrimonial house, and having begotten two children out of the wedlock, must be held to have acquired the status of a permanent resident of Coorg District. This position understandably, and according to us quite rightly, is not contested by Sri Pramod.
8. We are of the considered opinion that the issue brought before the Court by the writ appellants totally lack bona fide and is vexatious. It is quite apparent that by the time Smt. Ramani made entry into the service of the Bangalore University in the year 1983, these two gentlemen professors were very much in the service of the Bangalore University. Smt. Ramani though initially made entry into the service as a open category candidate on her own merit, she was subsequently appointed by way of direct recruitment to the post of Reader as far as back as on 20-2-1989. The appellants did not take any steps to assail the appointment of Smt. Ramani as Reader or to question her caste status. That event was followed by promotion of Smt. Ramani to the post of Professor in Physics with effect from 14-11-1997. The problem was created to Smt. Ramani only when her case came up for consideration before the Syndicate for her confirmation in the post of Professor held by her in selection grade on 24-8-1998. It needs to be noticed at this stage itself that the reference made by the Syndicate of the Bangalore University to the Caste Verification Committee and the order made by it and the order made by the Divisional Commissioner, Mysore in the appeal, are without authority of law as rightly pointed out by the learned Single Judge. The Tahsildar in all fairness, before cancelling the Caste Certificate issued to Smt. Ramani as far back as on 14-3-1981, ought to have given a fair opportunity to Smt. Ramani to have her say in the matter. That was denied totally to Smt. Ramani. Therefore, the learned Single Judge is quite justified and acted legally in quashing the order of the Tahsildar dated 11-6-2001.
9. The acquisition of the status of Scheduled Tribe by Smt. Ramani by virtue of the fact of her marriage to Sri Devaraj in the year 1977 and being a permanent resident of Coorg District from 1977 onwards is unimpeachable. It is not even the case of the appellants that Smt. Ramani was not accepted by the community of Kuruba in Coorg District as a member of their community after Smt. Ramani married to Sri Devaraj. On the other hand, the evidence on record would clearly show that she was accepted and treated as a member of the community to which Sri Devaraj belongs. Looking from any angle, at this distance of time, it is not open for anybody to question the caste status of Smt. Ramani.
10. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, we dismiss the writ appeals, however, with no order as to costs.
11. Sri Deshraj, learned Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks.