WILLIAM GONSALVES Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was declared defeated in general elections held for the post of Panch member from Ward No.VII in Village Panchayat of Santa Cruz in the year 2017 at the hands of the petitioner, has assailed the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Caste Certificate, Porvorim, i.e. respondent no.2, allowing the claim of the respondent no.4 as belonging to Christian Mahar community (OBC). The respondent no.4, Mariano Luis Anselmo De Araujo contested the election from Ward no. VII on the basis of the certificate obtained by him from the Deputy Collector and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Panaji-Goa on 24.05.2017, when the said certificate was put up for scrutiny before respondent no.2 Committee duly constituted for verification of caste claims, it is the petitioner who had intervened in the proceedings before the Committee. By the impugned order passed on 11.04.2019, the complaint filed by the petitioner before the Caste Scrutiny Committee challenging the certificate issued in favour of the respondent no.4 has been rejected and by the very same order, the Committee scrutinized the claim of the respondent no.4 belonging to Christian Mahar community and has granted the claim, certifying that the respondent no.4 belongs to the said community which is included in the list of Other Backward Classes at serial no.12. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said decision and has impugned the same in the present writ petition.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel, Mr. Parag Rao appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Devidas J. Pangam, the learned Advocate General with Mr. Shivdatt Munj, the learned Additional Government appearing for the respondents no.1 and 3 and Mr. Amey Kakodkar, learned counsel for respondent no.4. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Rao assail the impugned order passed by the Committee on various grounds, the predominant being non-adherence to the procedure prescribed while determining the claim of the respondent no.4 and, in particular, the procedure as set out in the order passed by the State Government on 01.11.2015 pursuant to the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Mr. Andrew D'Cunha v/s. State of Goa And Others (Writ Petition No.268/2013 dated 23.09.2013). Mr. Rao would submit that the detailed procedure set out for verification of the social status which has been notified by the State Government has been completely given a go-by and the Committee has adjudicated the claim in a very perfunctory manner. He would invite our attention to the report of the Vigilance Cell which comprise of statements of the claimant's close relatives who deny his social status as claimed. He would invite our attention to the inquiry report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, North, Porvorim-Goa addressed to the Director of Social Welfare and relying upon the same, would submit that there is no evidence rendered by the claimant before the Committee to establish that he belong to Christian Mahar community which would have entitled him to contest the post which was reserved for the said category. The learned counsel would urge that the petitioner has raised serious objections to the claim set out by the respondent no.4 but his submissions have been rejected cursorily. He would submit that the reliance is placed on the certificate issued by the Christian Backward Class Committee which is unregistered society and which would confer no legal status on the claimant and has not backed his claim, Mr. Rao would argue that the claimant has even failed to produce any documents on record and despite his failure, the caste certificate in his favour has been verified and held to be valid.

(3.) The learned Advocate General representing respondents no.1 to 3 would invite our attention to the procedure to be followed in verification of the caste claim in order to ascertain whether the claimant belonged to the particular caste, and he would submit that in view of the decision rendered by this Court (supra), where a statement was made to the effect that necessary guidelines could be formulated for verification of the claims of respective castes and tribes, in furtherance of the directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v/s. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others , 1994 6 SCC 241 and since the State was committed to issue appropriate comprehensive order in tune with the said judgment, the order was issued by the State Government which dealt with verification of social status (Caste Certificate). The learned Advocate General would submit that the said procedure must be strictly adhered to for verification of social status and the said order issued on 01.11.2015 outlined the procedure to be adopted by the Vigilance Cell and also the procedure to be followed by Scrutiny Committee for grant of verification of social status. He would submit that the vigilance inquiry would provide in-depth assessment of the candidate's claim of belonging into a particular caste/tribe and the Scrutiny Committee, apart from the report of the Vigilance Cell, is expected to obtain the report from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate based on the information provided by the applicant at the time when he prefer an application for securing the caste certificate. The Scrutiny Committee shall then pass a reasoned order and after affording opportunity to the claimant, adjudicate his claim either by confirming the said certificate or refusing to do so, thereby rejecting the claim. Falling in line with the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors , 2013 4 SCC 465 , it is also permissible for the Committee to entertain the objections received by it while adjudicating claim of the candidate and after dealing with the issues raised by the objectioner, the Committee shall pass an order in the manner prescribed by the said order.