IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.51682 OF 2014 (GM-CC) BETWEEN:
SMT.MANGALAMBIKE W/O BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. GOVT. SCHOOL TEACHER (DISCHARGED), R/O 345, CHANNAKESH NILAYA, T. DASARAHALLI, BANGALORE-73.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE) AND:
DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, V.V. TOWERS, BANGALORE-01.
BY ITS SECRETARY.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI C. JAGADEESH, ADVOCATE) **** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-D DATED 7.7.2014 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner filed the present writ petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 7.7.2014 passed by the respondent – District Caste Verification Committee (‘DCVC’ for short).
2. It is the case of the petitioner that she belongs to ‘Beda Jangama’ caste by birth and her husband belongs to ‘Adi Karnataka’ and both the said castes are categorized as Scheduled Castes. The petitioner after the marriage obtained the Caste Certificate of caste of her husband thinking that she would get the caste of husband and joined the duties as Government School Teacher in Hindi w.e.f. 3.8.1994. While she was working as Government School Teacher, the Joint Director of Public Instructions removed her from service on the ground that she has produced the false caste certificate. Since she belongs to ‘Beda Jangama’ caste, she applied for the Caste Certificate and after enquiry, the Tahsildar issued Caste Certificate to her as per Annexure-A stating that she belongs to ‘Beda Jangama’ caste. Pursuant to the same, the service register was corrected and the caste of the petitioner was entered as ‘Beda Jangama’ 3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order of removal passed by the Joint Director of Public Instructions, approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in Application No.240/1995. The Tribunal considering the material on record by an order dated 15.3.1995 (Annexure- B) disposed of the application observing as under:
“The applicant seems to be claiming the status for the benefit of reservation, on the ground that she is “Beda Jangama”. Recently, the High Court of Karnataka has issued directions to the State Government to refer the matter to the relevant committee to examine this aspect. The case of the applicant shall be considered appropriately by the Competent Authority, as to whether she is a Scheduled Caste or Tribe. Till then, she shall have to be allowed to be in service. Till appropriate decision is taken her services cannot be terminated.”
4. Subsequently, the Appointing Authority has requested the respondent - District Verification Committee to verify and report as to whether the petitioner belongs to ‘Beda Jangama’ caste or not. Thereafter the District Verification Committee proceeded to pass the impugned order canceling the Caste Certificate of the petitioner. Hence the present writ petition is filed for the relief sought for.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
6. Sri Praveen Kumar Raikote, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order passed by the respondent – District Caste Verification Committee is in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and that the Committee before passing the impugned order has not issued any notice to the petitioner as contemplated under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Rules, 1992 (‘Rules’ for short). He further contended that as per Rule 4 of the Rules, the Committee shall consist of four members and in the instant case, admittedly the impugned order passed by the respondent – Caste Verification Committee is signed by only three members and hence the Members of the Committee have not followed the procedure as contemplated under the Rules. Therefore he sought to allow the writ petition by quashing the impugned order passed by the respondent.
7. Per contra, Sri C. Jagadeesh, learned counsel for the respondent while justifying the impugned order passed by the respondent contended that it is the duty and obligation of the members of the Committee to discharge their institutional responsibility. He would further contend that the authorities ought to have issued notice to the petitioner and followed the procedure as contemplated under Rule 4 of the Rules and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Because of the members of the respondent – Committee not discharging their institutional responsibility and not following the procedure as contemplated under the Rules, the petitioner is unnecessarily getting benefit from the acts of the respondent. The petitioner is dragging the proceedings from the year 1995 till today and she is enjoying the Government service on the wrong orders passed by the concerned authorities and therefore he sought to dismiss the writ petition.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that when the petitioner was working as Government School Teacher, the Department of Public Instructions removed her from service on the ground that she produced the false Caste Certificate. Thereafter the petitioner applied for the Caste Certificate and the jurisdictional Tahsildar after conducting enquiry issued the Caste Certificate as per Annexure-A stating that the petitioner belongs to ‘Beda Jangama’ caste. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner being aggrieved by the order of removal, approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in Application No.240/1995. The Tribunal by an order dated 15.3.1995 directed the competent authority to hold enquiry as to whether the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and till such enquiry is completed, the petitioner shall be allowed to be in service.
9. By careful reading of the impugned order at Annexure-D, it clearly indicates that before passing the impugned order, the respondent - District Caste Verification Committee has not issued notice or afforded opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Further, it is very strange that Annexure-D is signed by only three members of the District Caste Verification Committee. Whereas Rule 4 of the Rules clearly depicts as under:
“4. Caste Verification Committee.- (1) There shall be a committee called the Caste Verification Committee for each district to verify the caste certificate issued in respect of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The committee shall consist of the following members namely:-
(1) The Deputy Commissioner of the District who shall be the Chairman;
(2) The Deputy Secretary (Administration) of the Zilla Panchayat;
(3) The Tahsildar of Taluk;
(4) The District Social Welfare Officer who shall be the Member Secretary;
Provided that the State Government may constitute an Additional Caste Verification Committee for any District to verify the Caste Certificate issued in respect of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes which shall consist of the following members, namely:-
(i) An Officer not below the rank of Special Deputy Commissioner appointed by the State Government Chairman
(iii) The Tahsildar of the Taluk Member (iv) The District Social Welfare Officer Member”
10. A plain reading of the said provisions makes it clear that the District Caste Verification Committee consists of Chairman and there other members. Unfortunately the impugned order is signed by only three members which is impermissible. It clearly indicates that the members of the respondent - District Caste Verification Committee have not discharged their institutional responsibility and constitutional obligations with all spirit and in consonance with the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.,) Act, 1990 and the Rules, 1992. It is the duty and obligation of the members of the respondent – District Caste Verification Committee to follow the procedure under the Act and the Rules and issue notice to all the concerned persons before passing the impugned order. The same has not been done in the present case. In the circumstances, the very enactment introduced by the State Government has become a futile exercise. That is not the intention of the Legislature while enacting the provisions of the Act and the Rules.
For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the respondent as per Annexure-D is quashed. The matter is remanded to the respondent – District Caste Verification Committee for fresh consideration with a direction to follow the procedure as contemplated under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.,) Act, 1990 and the Rules, 1992 and pass reasoned order strictly in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-