M KUMBAIAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He is an advocate by profession. He is a former member of the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission. It is the case of the petitioner that he is having knowledge of and practical experience in the matters relating to human rights. He applied for being appointed as Member of the State Human Rights Commission ('Commission' for short). Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 also applied for being appointed as Members of the Commission. Certain other persons also applied for the said post. Respondent No. 3 and 4 are selected and appointed as Members of the Commission. The selection of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is under challenge in this writ petition. Sri M.S. Rajendra Prasad, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner is a Scheduled Caste candidate; though no reservation is provided under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 ('the Act' for short), the concerned authorities should have selected atleast one person from Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe category having regard to the intention contained in Article- 16 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the petitioner is equally competent as the selected candidate and there is no reason as to why he should be excluded from being appointed particularly when he belongs to Scheduled Caste category.

(2.) As is clear from Section- 21 of the Act, the State Commission shall consist of (a) a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of a High Court; (b) one Member who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or District Judge in the State with a minimum of seven years experience as District Judge; (c) one Member to be appointed from among persons having knowledge of or practical experience in matters relating to human rights.