Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 128 (1.26 seconds)
Documents citing B. Basavalingappa vs D. Munichinnappa on 23 September, 1964

Maroti S/O Vyankati Gaikwad And Others vs Dy. Director And Member Secretary, The ... on 15 September, 2023

49. The observations made by this Court in B. Basavalingappa v. D. Munichinnappa AIR 1965 SC 1269] in AIR para 7 in no manner dilutes the ratio of the judgment as laid down in AIR para 6 quoted above. This Court approved the High Court exercise of looking into the evidence to determine which was 15 the caste which was meant by the word "Bhovi" in the Order in the peculiar circumstances of the case where the fact was not disputed that there was no caste known as Bhovi in Mysore State before 1956. In para 7, these following two observations made by this Court are in full accord with the ratio as laid 20 down in para 6, they are : (AIR p. 1271, para 7) "7. ... It cannot be accepted that the President included the caste Bhovi in the Order though there was no such caste at all in Mysore State as it existed before 1956. ... If there was a caste known as Bhovi as such in Mysore State 25 as it existed before 1956, evidence could not be given to prove that any other caste was included in the Bhovi caste."
Bombay High Court Cites 90 - Cited by 0 - A G Gharote - Full Document

Srish Chandra Choudhury vs State Of Tripura And Ors. on 18 March, 1985

In Basavalingappa (supra) the question was one of identification of the case mentioned in the Scheduled Caste Order in the Society. It was to ascertain what the entry Bhovi caste meant. In Bhaiya Ram the problem was the identification of the whole tribe in the Society. In Bhaiya Lal the plea that though he was not a Chamar, he could claim the same status by reason of the fact that he belonged to the Dohar caste which was a sub-caste of the Chamar caste, was not accepted and enquiry of that kind was disallowed.
Gauhati High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - K N Saikia - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors on 28 November, 2000

The Government of India on 21.4.1969 wrote to the State Government that in view of Basavalingappa's case (supra) 'Halba-Koshti' community could be treated as Scheduled Tribe only if it is added to the list as a sub-tribe in the Scheduled Tribes Order and not otherwise. Thereafter few more circulars were issued by the State Government between 24.10.1969 and 6.11.1974 to recognize 'Halba-Koshtis' as 'Halbas' and indicated as to who were the authorities competent to issue certificates and the guidelines were given for enquiry. There was again departure in the policy of the State Government by writing a confidential letter No. CBC- 1076/1314/Desk-V dated 18.1.1977. Government informed the District Magistrate, Nagpur, that 'Halba-Koshtis' should not be issued 'Halba' Caste Certificate. Thereafter, few more circulars, referred to in paragraph 22 of the judgment, were issued. It may not be necessary to refer to those again except to the circular dated 31.7.1981 bearing No. CBC-1481/(703)/D.V. by which the Government directed that until further orders insofar as 'Halbas' are concerned, the school leaving certificate should be accepted as valid for the purpose of the caste. Vide Resolution dated 23.1.1985 a new Scrutiny Committee was appointed for verification of castes certificates of Scheduled Tribes. The High Court had observed in paragraph 23 of the judgment that several circulars issued earlier were withdrawn but the said circular dated 31.7.1981 was not withdrawn. For the first time on 8.3.1985 the Scrutiny Committee was authorized to hold enquiry if there was any reason to believe that the certificate was manipulated or fabricated or had been obtained by producing insufficient evidence. Referring to these circulars/resolutions the High Court took the view that the caste certificate issued to the respondent no. 1 could be considered as valid and upto 8.3.1985 the enquiry was governed by circular dated 31.7.1981. The High Court dealing with the stand of the State Government on the issue of 'Halba-Koshti', from time to time, and also referring to circulars/ resolutions/instructions held in favour of the respondent no. 1 on the ground that the appellant was bound by its own circulars/orders. No doubt, it is true, the stand of the appellant as to the controversy relating to 'Halba-Koshti' has been varying from time to time but in the view we have taken on question no. 1, the circulars /resolutions /instructions issued by the State Government from time to time, some time contrary to the instructions issued by the Central Government, are of no consequence. They could be simply ignored as the State Government had neither authority nor competency to amend or alter the Scheduled Tribes Order. It appears taking note of false and frivolous claims being made by persons not entitled to claim such status, the Government of India addressed letters and issued instructions between the period from 21.4.1969 to 1982 to impress that there should be strict enquiry before issuance of caste certificates to persons claiming Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe status; strict scrutiny into the caste of the parent should be effected as a check-point. The State Government issued Resolution dated 29.10.1980 in consonance with the instructions given by the Central Government laying down the guidelines on which the enquiry should be held before issue of Caste Certificate. Another Resolution dated 24.2.1981 was also issued for appointing a scrutiny committee to verify whether the Caste Certificate has been issued to person who is really entitled to it in view of the complaints of misuse of reservational benefits on a large scale. These Resolutions were operative as they had not been repealed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - S V Patil - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors on 28 November, 2000

The Government of India on 21.4.1969 wrote to the State Government that in view of Basavalingappa's case (supra) 'Halba-Koshti' community could be treated as Scheduled Tribe only if it is added to the list as a sub-tribe in the Scheduled Tribes Order and not otherwise. Thereafter few more circulars were issued by the State Government between 24.10.1969 and 6.11.1974 to recognize 'Halba-Koshtis' as 'Halbas' and indicated as to who were the authorities competent to issue certificates and the guidelines were given for enquiry. There was again departure in the policy of the State Government by writing a confidential letter No. CBC- 1076/1314/Desk-V dated 18.1.1977. Government informed the District Magistrate, Nagpur, that 'Halba-Koshtis' should not be issued 'Halba' Caste Certificate. Thereafter, few more circulars, referred to in paragraph 22 of the judgment, were issued. It may not be necessary to refer to those again except to the circular dated 31.7.1981 bearing No. CBC-1481/(703)/D.V. by which the Government directed that until further orders insofar as 'Halbas' are concerned, the school leaving certificate should be accepted as valid for the purpose of the caste. Vide Resolution dated 23.1.1985 a new Scrutiny Committee was appointed for verification of castes certificates of Scheduled Tribes. The High Court had observed in paragraph 23 of the judgment that several circulars issued earlier were withdrawn but the said circular dated 31.7.1981 was not withdrawn. For the first time on 8.3.1985 the Scrutiny Committee was authorized to hold enquiry if there was any reason to believe that the certificate was manipulated or fabricated or had been obtained by producing insufficient evidence. Referring to these circulars/resolutions the High Court took the view that the caste certificate issued to the respondent no. 1 could be considered as valid and upto 8.3.1985 the enquiry was governed by circular dated 31.7.1981. The High Court dealing with the stand of the State Government on the issue of 'Halba-Koshti', from time to time, and also referring to circulars/ resolutions/instructions held in favour of the respondent no. 1 on the ground that the appellant was bound by its own circulars/orders. No doubt, it is true, the stand of the appellant as to the controversy relating to 'Halba-Koshti' has been varying from time to time but in the view we have taken on question no. 1, the circulars /resolutions /instructions issued by the State Government from time to time, some time contrary to the instructions issued by the Central Government, are of no consequence. They could be simply ignored as the State Government had neither authority nor competency to amend or alter the Scheduled Tribes Order. It appears taking note of false and frivolous claims being made by persons not entitled to claim such status, the Government of India addressed letters and issued instructions between the period from 21.4.1969 to 1982 to impress that there should be strict enquiry before issuance of caste certificates to persons claiming Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe status; strict scrutiny into the caste of the parent should be effected as a check-point. The State Government issued Resolution dated 29.10.1980 in consonance with the instructions given by the Central Government laying down the guidelines on which the enquiry should be held before issue of Caste Certificate. Another Resolution dated 24.2.1981 was also issued for appointing a scrutiny committee to verify whether the Caste Certificate has been issued to person who is really entitled to it in view of the complaints of misuse of reservational benefits on a large scale. These Resolutions were operative as they had not been repealed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 616 - S V Patil - Full Document

Mana Adim Jamat Mandal vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 11 June, 2003

Until the Scheduled Caste Order was amended, it must be obeyed as it read and the State Government, therefore, must treat "Thandans" throughout Kerala as members of the Scheduled Castes and issue community certificates accordingly, The Supreme Court considered its earlier judgments in (1) B Basavalingappa v. D Munichinnappa, (2) Bhaiyalal v. Harikishan Singh, and (3) Srish Kumar Choudhury v. State of Tripura. Having considered these decisions the Court came to the conclusion that the entries in the Presidential Order have to be taken as final and the scope of inquiry and admissibility of evidence was confined with the limitations indicated. It was further held that it is not open to the court to make any addition or subtraction in the Presidential Order. In the result, the court directed the State Government to grant to all the members of the Thandan community, including those belonging to the Malabar District and the present Palghat District the benefits due to the Scheduled Castes included in the Schedule to the Constitution Scheduled Castes Order, as amended upto date and to issue to them community certificates accordingly.
Bombay High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 67 - A P Shah - Full Document

Keshao Vishwanath Sonone vs State Of Maha. Thru. Secty. And 2 Ors on 14 August, 2018

However, if the facts and circumstances in these cases are akin to the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Basavalingappa's case, in our view, it would be permissible for us to determine which was the caste meant by Gond Gowari included in the Scheduled Tribes Order of the State. Consequently, we will have to consider the evidence to that effect on record, as was done by the Apex Court.
Bombay High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - R K Deshpande - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next