AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
“10.1That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for record pertaining to case of petitioner from respondent no. 3.
10.2That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned letter no. 162/अ.ज.ज�.आ./ dated 07.04.2026 ANNEXURE-P/1 issued by Respondent No. 3 and memo no. 3366/ गु�.ली�./2026 dated 20.04.2026 ANNEXURE-P/2 issued by respondent no. 5 and also letter no. 215/स् था�. /2026 dated 20.04.2026 ANNEXURE-P/3 issued by respondent no. 7 as per Section 6 of Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 and Section 8(i)(J) of Right to Information Act, 2005, in the interest of justice.
10.3Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the illegal, arbitrary and without-jurisdiction action of respondent No. 3 in initiating proceedings for scrutiny of the social status of the petitioner on the basis of a complaint made by an unknown person. It is submitted that respondent No. 3 has no jurisdiction to scrutinize or determine the genuineness and validity of the caste certificate of the petitioner, as such power is vested in the competent Caste Scrutiny/Verification Committee under the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013. Learned counsel further submits that the personal information of the petitioner has also been furnished by respondent Nos. 5 and 7 to respondent No. 3 in violation of Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned proceedings, having been initiated without jurisdiction and contrary to the constitutional and statutory provisions, are liable to be quashed and set aside.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the notice in question has not been issued to the petitioner, but to the District Education Officer (DEO), pursuant to a complaint made against the petitioner. It is further submitted that, as on date, the concerned Ayog has not passed any adverse order or taken any final decision against the petitioner and has merely called for certain documents and information for the purpose of examining the complaint. Learned counsel for the State submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of such notice or by the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, she may approach the concerned Ayog by filing an appropriate application along with the relevant documents and may also seek an opportunity of hearing before any decision is taken in the matter.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record.
Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995 reads as under:-
“10.Powers of the Commission.- The Commission shall, while performing its functions under sub-section (1) of Section 9, have all the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit and in particular, in respect of the following matters, namely:-
(a)summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person from any part of the State and examining him on oath;
(b)requiring the discovery and production of any document;
(c)receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d)requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any Court or office;
(e)issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses and documents; and
(f)any other matter which may be prescribed.”
The High Court of Chhattisgarh in the matter of Rajju Lal Dhruw vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Co. Ltd and Another passed in WA No. 512/2017 passed on 02.08.2019, the Hon’ble Court has observed as under:-
“11.Coming to the scope of Section 9 of the Act, 1995, particularly Section 9(1)(a), it is only to act as a 'watch-dog' for protection afforded to the members of the Scheduled Tribes under the Constitution and under any other law for the time being in force. It is obviously a general power and if at all there is any instance of encroachment, intrusion or interdiction with regard to constitutional rights, it may be for the Commission to interfere for making or suggesting or recommending appropriate remedial measures. The courses of action to be performed by the Commission is more discernible from the other provisions such as clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) under Section 9(1) of the Act, 1995. Section 9(1)(b) refers to the functions of the Commission to make recommendations and to take steps to add particular tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. Similarly, Section 9(1)(c) refers to the functions to suggest improvement in the various welfare programmes or to watch the proper and timely implementation programmes meant for the welfare of the Scheduled Tribes to the State Government or such other bodies; Section 9(1)(d) deals with the advisory power vested to the Commission in the given circumstances and Section 9(1)(e) is with regard to such other functions as may be assigned to it by the State Government. The above provisions, in no way, deal with other aspects/disputes; particularly dealing with the service conditions between the employer and the employee, which rather is a forbidden field for the 'Ayog' and it is to be dealt with by such other appropriate authorities.”
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the powers conferred upon the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog under the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995, including the power to require the discovery and production of any document and to requisition any public record or a copy thereof from any Court or office, particularly in view of the submission made on behalf of the State that no adverse order or final decision has been passed against the petitioner by the concerned Ayog till date, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may approach the concerned authorities by filing an appropriate application along with the relevant documents and seek an opportunity of hearing in the matter.
Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the concerned Ayog and seek an opportunity of hearing, and, in the event such an application is filed, the concerned authorities shall consider the same and afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter proceed in accordance with law, keeping in view the powers conferred upon the Ayog under Section 9 & 10 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995.
With the aforesaid liberty and direction, the present petition stands disposed of.