IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.9685 OF 2017 (GM-CC) Between:
Selvakumar, S/o.Doreswami, Aged 41 years, Working as Resource Person, BRC, Thirthahalli-577432, Shimoga District, Residing at: Melina Kuruvalli, Thirthahalli-577432, Shimoga District. ... Petitioner (By Sri.Naveen Jois, Advocate for Sri.M.V.Ramesh Jois, Advocate) And:
1. The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, MS Building, Vidhana Veedhi, Bengaluru-560001.
2. The Appellate Authority and The Commissioner of Social Welfare Department, MS Building, Vidhana Veedhi, Bengaluru-560001.
3. Deputy Commissioner and Chairman, Caste Verification Committee, Shimoga District-577201.
4. The Tahsildar, Thirthahalli Taluk-577432, Shimoga District. ... Respondents (By Sri.C.Jagadish, Spl.Counsel) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order in C.V. Appeal No.40/2008-09 dated 28.01.2017 passed by Respondent No.2 at Annex-K and allow the appeal.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Sri C.Jagadish, learned Special Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner, inter alia, has prayed for the following reliefs:
“a) Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other proper writ or direction quashing the impugned order in C.V.Appeal No.40/2008-09 dated 28.01.2017 passed by the 2nd respondent at Annexure-K, and allow the appeal as prayed for in the interest of justice and equity.
b) Pass any suitable orders or directions to the respondents in the circumstances of the case including the cost of the proceedings.”
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and I have perused the records. Respondent No.4 had issued Caste Certificate to the petitioner. Thereafter by an order dated 30.08.2004, respondent No.4 has cancelled the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. Respondent No.3 upheld the validity of the order passed by respondent No.4. Respondent No.2 remitted the matter in appeal. However, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed for default of appearance by an order dated 28.01.2017.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.3 had in fact heard the arguments on merits and had kept the matter reserved for orders. However, instead of passing an order on merits, by the impugned order dated 28.01.2017, the appeal itself was dismissed for want of prosecution.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has not been diligent in prosecuting the proceedings and therefore, the matter may be remitted to the Appellate Authority to decide the same afresh on merits.
6. In view of the submissions made and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 28.01.2017 is hereby quashed and set aside. The Appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner in accordance with law on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- which shall be paid to the respondent in appeal.
7. Accordingly the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Akc