K J TAMILARASAN Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR (REVENUE) SOUTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the second respondent in his proceedings No.3333/TOV/A2/Certificates/2018-19/08 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to issue a Community Certificate to the petitioner to the effect that he belongs to Adi Dravidar Scheduled Caste Community with origin status along with Residence-cum-Nationality Certificate.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he belongs to Adi Dravidar Scheduled Caste Community. His forefathers lived in the Union Territory of Puducherry and he is residing permanently at Puducherry along with his parents. Further, the petitioner's predecessors, viz., his grandfather Anandan as early as in the year 1931, purchased property in Puducherry, which shows that his predecessors originated from the Union Territory of Puducherry. The petitioner did his schooling at Puducherry and completed +2 in March 2018 and secured First Class. He appeared for 2019 NEET Examination and passed with 286 marks. The petitioner has produced his Community Certificate dated 20.07.2016 in support of his community status that he belongs to SC Adi Dravidar Community, issued by the Revenue Department of the Union Territory of Puducherry before the Director of CENTAC, Puducherry, who was looking after NEET admissions, and upon perusal of the same, he insisted the petitioner to furnish a recent Community Certificate. The CENTAC authorities were of the view that the Community Certificate issued to the petitioner by the Tahsildar, dated 20.07.2016 could not be treated as a recent one, as the same was issued three years ago. Hence, the petitioner, through his father, applied with the second respondent for issuance of a fresh Community-cum-Residence Certificate for him on 10.08.2017. The second respondent, after a delay of one year, rejected the claim for issuance of Community Certificate by the impugned order dated 07.08.2018, citing the reason that on the discreet enquiry conducted by them, it was found that neither the petitioner's father Karthikeyan, nor his grandfather Thanikachalam lived in Puducherry region on or before the promulgation of Presidential Order, namely the Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964, which was notified in the Official Gazette on 05.03.1964, as they migrated to Puducherry region only after the crucial date, i.e. 05.03.1964. Hence, challenging the said order dated 07.08.2018, the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

(3.) When the Writ Petition is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner, by adverting to the averments made in the affidavit, contended that the second respondent has passed the impugned order based on the report received from the Village Administrative Officer (VAO) by conducting discreet enquiry. In this regard, the learned counsel submitted that it is well settled law that for issuance of Community Certificate, the Revenue Authorities cannot conduct any discreet enquiry behind the back of the individual seeking issuance of Community Certificate. If the enquiry had been conducted by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, he would have produced all the necessary documents in support of his claim. Since the discreet enquiry was conducted without affording an opportunity of hearing, based on which the VAO has submitted the report, the second respondent has passed the impugned order, which is liable to be set aside.