SANTGYANI MAHANAND Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dtd. 4/11/2015 (Annexure P/3) passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the petitioner's services to the post of Peon has been terminated pursuant to the report of the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short 'the Committee'), whereby the petitioner's claim has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner does not belong to 'Gond' Scheduled Tribes caste, whereas he belongs to 'Gada' Scheduled Castes community and prior to 1971, his ancestral originally resides in State of Odisha .

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are that, on 30/8/1989, the petitioner was appointed as Peon in the office of Respondent No.3 against Scheduled Tribe 'Gond' category under the special recruitment drive for the special category and class of people. The caste certificate of 'Gond' community has been issued on 21/5/1986 by the office of Collector (Adim Jati Harijan Kalyan Shakha) Raipur. The Department, after examining the caste certificate, educational certificate and other documents relating to the testimonials, offered appointment to the petitioner. During the service period of the petitioner, on the basis of anonymous complaint regarding his caste and certificate, the Respondent No.4-Committee initiated inquiry regarding his caste certificate and vide order dtd. 20/8/2015, the Committee came to the conclusion that the petitioner belongs to 'Ganda' (Scheduled Caste) and not 'Gond' (Scheduled Tribe) and invalidated his caste certificate issued by the Collector and communicated its report to the Department/Respondent No.3 vide letter dtd. 26/10/2015 with order dtd. 20/8/2015 (Annexure P/2 colly). Thereafter, the Respondent No.3, pursuant to the order dtd. 20/8/2015 of the Respondent No.4/Committee, the Respondent No.3 passed an order dtd. 4/11/2015 (Annexure P/3) terminating the services of the petitioner. Thereafter, against the order of termination dtd. 4/11/2015, the petitioner, on 13/11/2015, preferred an appeal (Annexure P/4) before the Respondent No.1 under the provision of Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules, 1966, which was dismissed by order dtd. 22/10/2016 (Annexure P/4 colly) by the Respondent No.1 holding it to be not maintainable in view of Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (for short the 'Act, 2013). Hence, this petition by the petitioner seeking following relief(s) :-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has secured appointment on the post of Peon in the office of Respondent No.3 on the basis of caste certificate of 'Gond' (Scheduled Tribe) community duly issued by the Collected after submitting related documents but the Committee in an arbitrary manner invalidated the caste certificate of the petitioner and the appeal preferred against the order of Committee has been summarily rejected by the Respondent No.1 being not maintainable, is bad in law. The Respondent No.4 while passing the order dtd. 20/8/2015 and communication dtd. 26/10/2015 thereof did not consider the case of the petitioner in its true perspective and even during the enquiry, it has not given proper and sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to disprove the allegation, as such, the order dtd. 26/10/2015 (Annexure P/2) and consequent dismissal from service vide order dtd. 4/11/2015 (Annexure P/3) is completely bad in law. Learned counsel also submits that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, the Department has verified the testimonials as well as caste certificate, therefore, further enquiry relating to the caste of the petitioner to the effect was not proper. Learned counsel also submits that the Respondent No.3, in mechanical manner, without giving proper opportunity of hearing straightway passed the order of dismissal from service of the petitioner without considering the fact that the petitioner has been workign in the Department for more than 26 years and, as such, his services is liabel to be protected in view of circular of the Govt. of Chhattisgarh. The Department instead of removal from service on the basis of incorrect certificate should have been allowed the petitioner to remain in the service without benefit of caste certificate or further any benefit in future on the basis of said caste certificate as per judicial pronouncement of the Court even there is a circular in this regard of the State of Chhattisgarh, G.A.D., dtd. 1/10/2011 (Annexure P/5). Last but not the least submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the caste certificate of the petitioner of 'Gond' (Scheduled Tribe) community has been invalidated by the Committee but the fact is that he is a member of Scheduled category, therefore, his services is liable to be protected.