RAJENDRA SINGH SALUJA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed by the Caste Verification Committee dated 10-8-2011 (Annexure P-1). The Committee by the said order held that the petitioner do not belong to "Sansi" (Scheduled Caste) Community and directed confiscation of the Caste Certificate issued in favour of the petitioner and further directed to take appropriate action against the petitioner pursuant to cancellation of aforesaid Caste Certificate. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that initially the petitioner preferred an application dated 20-2-2008 for grant of Provisional Caste Certificate. The application was pregnant with all requisite documents and material. The concerned authority after examining the application and its averments was pleased to issue the Provisional Caste Certificate, dated 31-5-2008 (Annexure P-9). Thereafter, the petitioner preferred application for grant of Permanent Caste Certificate on 3-6-2008. The learned Senior Counsel submits that after due verification and proper application of mind, certificate dated 8-8-2008 (Annexure P-16), i.e., Permanent Caste Certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) The learned Senior Counsel submits that it appears that subsequently some frivolous complaints were made against the petitioner, which persuaded the State Level Caste Verification Committee (hereinafter called as the "Committee") to take cognizance of the matter. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the said Committee is constituted as per the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, 1994 6 SCC 241. In the said judgment, the Apex Court has prescribed the methodology to verify the caste status of a person and the entire enquiry needs to be conducted in consonance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil . The learned Counsel by placing reliance on various circulars issued by the General Administration Department (GAD) submits that the said direction of the Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil , was circulated in the shape of executive instruction and it was directed that if Vigilance Officers' report is in favour of the candidate, no further action is required to be taken by the Committee. He placed reliance on the GAD, circular dated 1-8-1996 in this regard. He further submits that the Caste Certificate was issued strictly in consonance with the GAD circular, dated 11-7-2005, which prescribes the methodology of issuance of a valid Caste Certificate. He further submits that the Revenue Authorities consumed sufficient time to verify the genuineness of the information furnished by the petitioner for obtaining the Caste Certificate and only thereafter the Caste Certificate was issued.

(3.) The learned Counsel submits that the order impugned is bad in law because the decision making process was erroneous as well as the ultimate decision Thus, the attack is of two fold--