RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 21.9.2001 and 29.9.2001. The former cancels his registration and admission in Shri Krishna Medical College and Hospital (hereinafter referred to as SKMCH ) in the MBBS Course. The latter, issued by the Principal of the College, communicates the cancellation to him.

(2.) The Petitioner is stated to have competed successfully in the Medical and Dental Admission Test for the MBBS Course and was admitted at SKMCH, Muzaffarpur commencing in the Session 1994-95. The Course duration was of five years. In 1999 a complaint was made that he did not belong to the Harijan Dusadh, a scheduled caste, on basis of which he had secured admission, but that he belonged to Backward Caste Kurmi, an Other Backward Caste (hereinafter referred to as OBC ). The matter was referred for enquiry to the SDO Nalanda who by an exparte report dated 22.11.1999 opined that the Petitioner was not the adopted son of Vijay Paswan and that it was a sham arrangement to avail the benefit of reservation as a member of the scheduled caste. The Petitioner was restrained from attending the course. He filed CWJC No. 11904 of 1999. On 8.2.2000 a Bench of this Court permitted the Petitioner to continue with the course and also attend Rotatory House Internship Training. The writ application was allowed on 19.2.2011 holding that No. opportunity was given to him prior to the submission of the report by the SDO. Liberty was however granted to proceed afresh in accordance with law. On 4.6.2011 a show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner in context of the controversy followed by another show cause notice dated 27.4.2001. The Petitioner duly replied to the same. The impugned orders have then been passed. In the meantime the Petitioner completed the entire term of the course along with the Rotatory Internship Training. He has all the requisites of a qualified professional but on account of the impugned orders he stands to be completely deprived of his educational qualifications and the benefits of the same.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the impugned order suffers from the same vice as the earlier ex parte enquiry. His caste status was a question of fact. He had to be allowed to participate in any enquiry for the purpose with opportunity to defend. No. enquiry from any Villagers could be held behind his back without due opportunity for defence and cross examination before the same could be relied upon. The mere giving of a show cause notice and a reply shall not suffice the principles of natural justice given the factual nature of the issue of adoption and consequent caste status. It was lastly submitted that determination of caste status had necessarily to be done by the committee as directed in (1994) 6 SCC 241 (Madhuri Patil V/s. Commissioner, Tribal Development).