GHANSHYAM DAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri U.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 5, Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava, Additional Standing Counsel for the Central Government appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 1 and Sri Anurag Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 6.

(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court against the order dated 31.3.1999, whereby the caste certificate dated 6.12.1996 issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner has alleged that he is Kasera by birth, which is sub-caste of Shilpkar caste. The petitioner has alleged that on his representation a Caste Certificate dated 6.12.1996 was issued which provides that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Castes category and without affording any opportunity the said certificate was cancelled by the order dated 31.3.1999. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Kasera is a sub-caste of Shilpkar and the Scheduled Castes Certificate are being issued to the persons of Kasera of sub-caste in the State of U. P. He further submits that the certificate of caste was issued to the petitioner on 6.12.1996 and the Kasera community was added in Schedule-I at Serial No. 59 in the category of backward by the Notification dated 15.9.1997 and, therefore, on the basis of the Notification dated 15.9.1997 the caste certificate issued to the petitioner cannot be cancelled. He further submits that before passing of the impugned order, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner and the impugned order is violative of principle of natural justice.

(3.) Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava, learned standing counsel for the Union of India submits that at no point of time the Kasera community was included in the list of Scheduled Castes in relation to the State of U. P. as synonym to Shilpkar community. He further submits that the petitioner has filed the writ petition on misconceived facts and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed for the facts and reasons given in paragraphs 7 and 9 of the counter-affidavit.