IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.11561 OF 2013 (GM-CC) BETWEEN:
A.R. MAHESHA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O. RANGANAIKA ALATHUR VILLAGE CHIKKAIAHNA CHATRA HOBLI NANJANGUD TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI R.D.RENUKARADHYA, ADV. FOR SRI P. NATARAJU, AD.V) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUR DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDINGS BENGALURU-1.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSORE SUB-DIVISION MYSORE-570 005.
3. THE TAHSILDAR NANJANGUD TALUK NANJANGUD MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.
4. CHIKKAVENKATASHETTY MAJOR S/O LATE PUTTASHETTY ALATHUR VILLAGE CHIKKAIAHNA CHATRA HOBLI, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE-DISTRICT-571 301. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI C JAGADEESH, SPL. G.A. FOR R1 TO R3 SRI M.V. CHARATI, ADV. FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R3, IN CASE NO.ICC.MISC.13/10-11 DT.16.6.12, VIDE ANN-L.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri R.D. Renukaradhya for Sri P. Nataraju, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri C. Jagadeesh, Special Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3 and Sri M.V. Charati, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 16.06.2012, by which the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled.
4. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that respondent No.3-Tahsildar has no jurisdiction to cancel the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission made at the bar, it is evident that the impugned order dated 16.06.2012 is perverse and without jurisdiction. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.06.2012 is quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the respondents to take action against the petitioner, if so advised in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST