RUDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to an advertisement issued by the M. P. Public Service Commission, the petitioner Rudra Pratap Singh applied for the post of Civil Judge Class II as a Scheduled Tribe candidate and after appearing in the written examination was selected and recommended for appointment under the Scheduled Tribe quota vide intimation dated 8th May, 1987 sent to him by the Commission. Thereafter, since the petitioner's birth place and permanent residence were stated to be at Murar in Gwalior District, on an enquiry made by the State Government from the District authority concerned it was confirmed by the Additional Collector and District Magistrate, Gwalior vide his letter dated 2nd September, 1987 that the petitioner belonged to a Scheduled Tribe and was eligible to receive all facilities granted by the government to the candidates of such tribes. It was also confirmed vide the said letter that the requisite certificate to the above said effect had already been issued by the Scheduled Tribe Welfare Branch of the office of Collectorate, Gwalior in favour of the petitioner on 6th December, 1984. In the said certificate, it had been certified that the petitioner belonged to the Scheduled Tribe of "gond" in Gwalior District.

(2.) AFTER the abovesaid enquiry and verification had been made, the petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge Class II vide order dated 12th November, 1987 issued by the State Government. Under the terms of his appointment, the petitioner worked as a trainee Judge at Guna for a period of six months w. e. f. 12th November, 1987. Thereafter, after completion of his training, he was posted as Civil Judge Class II at Raigarh on probation for a period of two years. It was while he was so working as Civil Judge Class II at Raigarh that vide the impugned order dated 1st October, 1988 (Annexure-K) issued by the State Government his appointment order dated 12th November, 1987 was revoked with retrospective effect on the ground that on making further investigations pursuant to a complaint received against him it was found that the petitioner did not belong to any Scheduled Tribe and that the appointment order dated 12th November, 1987 had been issued to him on the basis of wrong facts and a false certificate. It is being aggrieved by the said order that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition in this court.

(3.) NOW, in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, we need not go into the merits of the question whether as alleged by the petitioner he belonged to the Scheduled Tribe of 'gond' in Gwalior District and as such his appointment as Civil Judge Class II under the Scheduled Tribe quota was legal and valid or whether as alleged by the State Government respondent No. 1 the petitioner had obtained a false certificate as regards belonging to a Scheduled Tribe and as such his appointment under the said quota was null and void. In fact, in our opinion, this is not the proper forum for determination of any such question. The limited questions with which we are concerned in this writ petition are whether the impugned action taken by the State Government- respondent No. 1 against the petitioner vide Annexure-K dated 1st October, 1988 was punitive in nature and if so whether the same was vitiated and invalid on account of the petitioner having not been afforded proper and fair opportunity to defend himself. Again, while proceeding to answer the abovesaid limited questions, we are also concerned with the further ancillary question as to whether in view of Article 235 of the Constitution it was for the High Court and not the State Government to hold an enquiry into the relevant conduct of the petitioner and thereafter recommend taking of suitable action against him to the State Government and if so the said course having not been adopted the impugned order of revocation of the appointment of the petitioner issued by the State Government was illegal and invalid for that reason.