SHOBA LAKSHMI Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER BENGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, petitioner is seeking to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 10. 12. 02 at annexure 'a and also to quash the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 30. 1. 02 at Annexure 'b' and for such other orders.

(2.) PETITIONER is said to be belonging to Maleru caste and is employed as an Administrative and Accounts Assistant in the office of the 4th respondent i. e. , Sahitya Academy, Bangalore; the 4th respondent alleging that she has wrongly stated her caste as Maleru by producing the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar and thereby committed a misconduct, has referred the matter to the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent being the Chairman of the Caste Verification Committee on verification ordered for cancellation of the certificate issued by the tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk. According to the petitioner, the order passed by the 2nd respondent to cancel the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar to the petitioner is self contradictory and without appreciating the fact that petitioner belongs to Maleru caste; at an undisputed point of time the caste of the petitioner's father, her brothers and her near relatives is shown as Maleru; though she hails from shimoga District where large number of families belonging to Maleru caste are residing, as she was residing at Bangalore at the relevant point of time, she applied and obtained the caste certificate from the tahsildar, Bangalore, who, before issuing the certificate had conducted an enquiry as contemplated and had issued the certificate which is not liable to be cancelled and without appreciating the same, the 2nd respondent held that petitioner belongs to Brahmin Maleru caste and the caste certificate issued to her is liable to be cancelled which order is passed without verification of relevant facts and without holding an enquiry as required under law in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and it is wholly on irrelevant and unsustainable grounds and not in terms of the directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of MADURI PAUL AND ANOTHER vs ADDL. COMMISSIONER Tribal Development in Challenging the said order, as per the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of appointment etc. ,) Rules, 1993, petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent, who in turn, dismissed the appeal stating that appeal is not maintainable. As against the said order, she filed W. P. No. 26961 / 02 before this Court. This Court while allowing the said petition has remanded the matter back to the 1st respondent with a direction to hear both the parties and to decide the matter on merits in accordance with law.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, after joining the service in the year 1994 her life has become totally miserable and she has been ill-treated and harassed by her departmental head, due to which, she had to approach various forums on several occasions; at the time of her appointment in the 4th respondent's department she had submitted the original caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bangalore and although she belongs to Maleru caste, alleging that she has secured the appointment by falsely representing her caste, action was initiated against her and she has been kept under suspension since 16. 2. 02. Since she has been harassed by the Regional Secretary, she filed a writ petition which is pending before this Court. According to her, the certificate produced by her father as per the service records and also of her brother depicts that they belong to maleru caste, despite that the 1st respondent dismissed the appeal only on unsustainable grounds. The Karnataka State gazette published for Shimoga district refers to the fact that there is no caste like Maleru Brahmin but there is only one caste known as Maleru which is a scheduled tribe and that it is not in dispute that petitioners also hails from Shimoga District. The dispute as to the caste of Maleru, was taken to the Supreme Court and the apex Court in the case of M. Narayanappa Vs. Govt of Karnataka in w. P. I 1894/85 passed an order that till such enquiry is held and a positive conclusion is arrived at, a person belonging to Maleru caste shall not be subjected to any criminal proceedings or departmental enquiry. In the said order it has also directed the State of Karnataka to withdraw all the proceedings against the persons belonging to Maleru caste and in pursuant to the said order, the Government of Karnataka has issued a GO. dated 11. 3. 02 stating that the persons belonging to maleru caste who have the benefit of the certificate should not be in any way harassed or subjected to any enquiry or dismissal and that the said order is in her favour and on the face of it, the 1st respondent could not have dismissed the appeal filed by her. Further, according to the petitioner, the respondent/authorities have ignored all the relevant factors that the she belongs to Maleru caste and that she has not obtained and produced any false certificate.