Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Gudiya Devi vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 November, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38407 of 2018
Petitioner :- Gudiya Devi
Respondent :- State Of U P And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushma Devi,Daya Shankar Prasad Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Shukla
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard Sri D.S.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.7 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has come to this Court, challenging the order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the District Level Committee cancelling the caste certificate of Gond caste of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had contested the election of Gram Pradhan in the year 2016 and was elected as Gram Pradhan on the basis of aforesaid caste certificate. It is claimed that once the certificate is cancelled, he is no longer eligible to function as Gram Pradhan. He further submits that before cancelling the caste certificate, the District Level Committee did not follow the procedure prescribed under the Government Order dated 05.01.1996 as has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner reported in AIR 1995 SC 94. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Alimuddin Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2014 (125)RD 437.
Insofar as the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner (supra) is concerned, the same is with regard to the direction that the State Government to constitute a committee to look into such kind of disputes and frame rules.
It is to be noted that pursuant to the direction of the Supreme Court, the rules have been framed, in which District Level Committee, Divisional Level Committee and the State Level Committee have been constituted with regard to the scrutiny of the caste certificate issued to the various people. It is not disputed that against the order of the District Level Committee, the petitioner can file an appeal before the Divisional Level Committee constituted for specific purpose for seeking caste certificate to the citizens which is an Expert Body.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Level Scrutiny Committee, while rejecting the claim of the petitioner, has not followed the procedure prescribed in the Government Order dated 5.1.1996 and, therefore, the order of the District Level Scrutiny Committee is an order without jurisdiction and is nullity in the eye of law and the High Court should quash the same. He further submits that in the case of Alimuddin (Supra), the Single Judge of this Court has held that the alternative remedy is not a complete bar and this Court can interfere in such cases.
It is to be understood that there cannot be any dispute with regard to proposition of law that the alternative remedy is not a bar for this Court to interfere in an order, if the same has been passed against the law. But it is also to be understood that there has to be a valid reason to bye pass the remedy in the Statute. It has also to be kept in mind whether a person belongs to a particular caste or not is a question that has to be gone into by an Expert Body constituted in this behalf. An order passed by the District Level Scrutiny Committee can be challenged before the Divisional Level Scrutiny Committee and the order passed by the Divisional Level Scrutiny Committee can be challenged before the State Level Scrutiny Committee.
From the pleadings and the arguments, no cogent material has been shown as to why the alternative remedy available to the petitioner under the Statute should be bye passed.
In view of the above, we are not inclined to interfere in the order impugned, as the petitioner can approach the Divisional Level Scrutiny Committee by filing an appeal against the order impugned passed by the District Level Scrutiny Committee.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Lbm/-
(Vivek Varma,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Gudiya Devi vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 November, 2018
Judges
  • Abhinava Upadhya
Advocates
  • Sushma Devi Daya Shankar Prasad Singh