Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1406/2013 of Daulat Singh @ Daulat Kunwar Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS on 30 December 2013
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1406 (MS) of 2013 Daulat Singh @ Daulat Kunwar ……Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ……..Respondents Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Advocate, present for the petitioner. 2.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALWrit Petition No. 1406 (MS) of 2013
Daulat Singh @ Daulat Kunwar
……Petitioner
Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ……..Respondents Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Advocate, present for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, present for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 4.
3. Rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Court. The same is taken on record.
4. Petitioner claims to be a member of Scheduled Tribes Community which is called “Jaunsari”. However, the Caste Certificate which was given to him in the year 1991 and thereafter in the year 2007 is of Scheduled Caste category.
5. Case of the petitioner is that he is Scheduled Tribes and he was liable to be given a Certificate of Scheduled Tribes. His further contention is that his father has been given a Scheduled Tribe Certificate and his brother and his children have all been given Scheduled Tribe Certificates. Moreover, the contention of the petitioner is that the Caste Certificate which was given to him in the year 1991, it was given to him when he was a school going child and it was given by mistake and this should be rectified.
6. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State of Uttarakhand contends that on the earlier round of litigation (WPMS No.809 of 2012), this Court has directed the matter to be looked into by a Scrutiny Committee, therefore, a Scrutiny Committee met on 27.02.2013. The Scrutiny Committee was comprising of the District Magistrate, Dehradun and following officers:-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
(1).Chief Development Officer, Dehradun.
(2).Addl. District Magistrate (Admin.), Dehradun.
(3).Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chakrata.
(4).Tahsildar, Chakrata.
(5).District Social Welfare Officer, Dehradun.
(6).Sri Daulat Kunwar (Petitioner), and
(7).Sri Khimmidas (complainant).
7. The Scrutiny Committee examined the matter in the presence of the petitioner as well as complainant Khimmidas and on 27.02.2013, the Scrutiny Committee came to the conclusion that a Caste Certificate was given to the petitioner on 06.08.2007 which was of Scheduled Caste (Kolta) and now another Caste Certificate of Scheduled Tribes cannot be given under the Rules as there is no such provision in the Rules.
8. Case of the petitioner is that the Caste Certificate of Scheduled Caste which has been issued to the petitioner has been issued by mistake and petitioner actually belongs to Scheduled Tribes Community.
9. This Court is of the view that the Scrutiny Committee has fallen in an error while examining the matter of the petitioner as it has only reasoned that since on an earlier occasion the Caste Certificate which was given to the petitioner was of Scheduled Caste therefore it cannot be changed. But on the contrary the position taken by the petitioner is that he actually belongs to a Scheduled Tribe and the Scheduled Caste Certificate was given to him wrongly.
10. This matter is therefore, remitted back to the Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee shall re-examine the matter on the strength of the evidence given by the petitioner regarding his social status, whether he is Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes and thereafter examine the matter including the fact that the father of the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe Category and brothers of the petitioner and their children also belong to Scheduled Tribes Category. The matter should be examined in that light and not with an assumption that since earlier a Scheduled Caste Certificate was given to the petitioner, therefore, it cannot be changed. It is made clear that while considering the case of the petitioner, the Scrutiny Committee shall first examine as to whether petitioner actually belongs to “Jaunsari” or not and thereafter they shall issue such certificate or order appropriate authority to issue such a certificate. In other words the claim of the petitioner should be examined on the merit of his claim.
11. This will be subject to the fact that petitioner has not taken any benefit of a Scheduled Caste Category earlier.
12. Let a decision be taken as expeditiously as possible but definitely within a period of 12 weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them.
13. Writ petition is disposed. No order as to costs.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
30.12.2013