HARSHPAL KAUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE four writ petitions have been heard together and are decided by common judgment as the facts and controversies are not only related to one person but are inter -linked.

(2.) THE respondents constituted a State Level Scrutiny Committee (in short "Committee") consists of three members, which according to the petitioner, was contrary to the subsequent directions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the same case of Kumari Madhuri Patil reported in : (1997) 5 SCC 437. Therein, the direction was given to constitute the committee of five members. It is also stated that the committee did not consider the objections about its constitution and proceeded without holding proper meetings. The petitioner then preferred writ petition No. 1110/2013 and one of the petition out of the four cases was decided in the meantime. In the meanwhile, the committee passed order on 14.03.2013 wherein the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled holding that she is not belonging to OBC.

(3.) THE petitioner, in person, has challenged, the constitution of the committee in the first writ petition mainly on the ground that constitution of the committee is not as per the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) directed for constitution of five members committee instead of three members as was earlier directed in the said case (in the year 1995). In the second writ petition, the order of the committee has been challenged where caste certificate has been cancelled. It is alleged that the committee passed order without sending the matter to the Vigilance Committee and causing inquiry as directed by Hon'ble Apex Court. The committee superficially passed the order by calling the report from the Collector without causing inquiry by themselves. The Collector submitted the report which was nothing but literally the same as was given earlier by the Tehsildar to cancel the caste certificate. The report of the committee so as the order are nothing but an empty formality to endorse the same view and the finding as was recorded by the Tehsildar in an illegal manner and had been set aside by the Court. It is also stated that the committee members had not attended the meeting with the coram and otherwise notices for hearing were given in such a manner that they were received by the petitioner after appointed date thus fair and proper opportunity of hearing was not given.