DINESH KUMAR SAH BHARTI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in memo No. 580 dated 30.6.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Madhubani (Respondent No. 2) by which he has held that the petitioner belongs to Halwai caste and not Kanu caste for which he had earlier been granted a caste certificate. The petitioner has further challenged the order dated 28.7.2008 (Annexure-7) passed in Case No. 01/2008 by the State Election Commissioner (Respondent No. 3) by which he has declared the petitioner as not qualified to hold the reserved post meant for extremely backward class on the basis of the order dated 30.6.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Madhubani and directed for filling up of the post in accordance with law.

(2.) The brief facts of this case are that the petitioner contested the election to the post of Mukhiya of Khutauna Gram Panchayat. The petitioner claiming to belong to Kanu caste, obtained caste certificate from the Circle Officer, Khutauna bearing No. 621 dated 10.2.2001 and on the basis of the same the Sub-Divisional Officer issued certificate No. 267 dated 24.7.2003 and the District Magistrate issued certificate No. 904 dated 26.7.2003 stating that the petitioner belongs to Kanu caste which has been placed under the list of extremely backward class. The petitioner was elected as Mukhiya of the said Panchayat. Subsequently, the respondent No. 8, Ram Babu Kamat, filed a petition before the Executive Magistrate, Phulparas, District- Madhubani (Respondent No. 6) alleging that the petitioner did not belong to Kanu caste and had wrongly been elected from the seat reserved for extremely backward class. It is stated in the writ petition that earlier the respondent No. 6, the Executive Magistrate submitted a report dated 13.6.2006 raising doubts regarding the said allegation but subsequently by a report dated 11.2.2007 (Annexure-2) submitted by the Respondent No. 6 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Phulparas (Respondent No. 5), he stated that the petitioner belongs to Halwai caste on the basis of the various documents available in the Circle records including the RS Khatian and the CS Khatian. The petitioner filed CWJC No. 4742 of 2007 challenging the said report dated 11.2.2007. During the pendency of the same, the Sub-Divisional Officer and the District Magistrate cancelled the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner which orders were also challenged in the said writ petition by amending the prayer. By order dated 13.5.2008, this Court held that the order having been passed without issuing notice to the petitioner and hearing him in the enquiry, the enquiry report dated 11.2.2007 and the orders dated 15.5.2007 and 1.6.2007 passed on the basis of the same were set aside and the matter was remanded back to the District Magistrate for fresh adjudication on the caste status of the petitioner in accordance with law after hearing all concerned including the respondent No. 6 therein, who is respondent No. 8 in the present writ petition.

(3.) Thereafter the matter was again heard by the District Magistrate and after hearing the petitioner and the respondent No. 8, he passed the aforesaid impugned order dated 30.6.2008 holding that the petitioner does not belong to Kanu caste rather to Halwai caste which is a backward class and not an extremely backward class. Earlier, on the basis of the previous order of the District Magistrate, the State Election Commission had passed an order dated 10.2.2008 removing the petitioner from his post but recalled the same on learning about the interim order dated 15.4.2008 passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition. Subsequently, on the basis of the order dated 30.6.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, the State Election Commissioner again heard the petitioner and respondent No. 8 and on the basis of the materials on the record passed the impugned order dated 28.7.2008 removing the petitioner from his post and directing holding of fresh election thereon.