Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7961 of 2019 Petitioner :- Rukam Veer Singh Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwani Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Vivek Kumar Rai,Anand Kumar Ray
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner's candidature for appointment to the post of Constable has been declined by the authorities on the ground that petitioner had relied upon a forged caste certificate, dated 10.7.2002, according to which, petitioner's caste is 'Mina' and is member of the Scheduled Tribe. In the enquiry it has been found that such a certificate has not been issued and, therefore, petitioner's candidature has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon a judgment of the Apex Court in Km. Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development, 1994 (6) SCC 241 as also subsequent judgments of the Apex Court in Sudhakar Vithal Kumbhare Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2004 (9) SCC 481 and G.M., Indian Bank Vs. R. Rani and another reported in J.T. 2008 (1) SC 88 to submit that matter ought to have been referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee and that the authorities unilaterally could not have determined petitioner's caste or cancel the registration.
Sri A.K. Ray, learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that as a matter of fact no certificate is ever issued to the petitioner and since petitioner had placed reliance upon forged certificate, as such, the question of caste verification by the Committee would not arise.
Perusal of the record would go to show that the District Magistrate, Dausa, has sent a letter to the Railway Protection Force, Jhansi, dated 17.11.2015, according to which, caste certificate, which is being relied upon by the petitioner, does not bear signatures of the then Tehsildar. The statement of Tehsildar has also been taken note of and the same has also been annexed alongwith the counter affidavit. The statement of the Tehsildar has been recorded way back in the year 2013 and has been relied upon for passing the order itself. The stand of the respondents is that in fact no caste certificate was issued to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Magistrate and the S.D.M. had also certified issuance of the caste certificate.
Admittedly, the basis of all such certification is the first certificate issued by the Tehsildar of the yer 2002-03. The signature of the Tehisldar on this caste certificate has been doubted and upon enquiry the concerned Tehsildar has certified that certificate do not contain his signatures. It is not a case that the earlier caste certificate is being doubted by the respondents for which the matter may have to be referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Where it is found that initial caste certificate itself is forged and in the enquiry it is otherwise found that petitioner is not resident of the place concerned, no exception can be taken, if his candidature is rejected.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Ranjeet Sahu