AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ
The application to condone the delay of 591 days in preferring the appeal is not opposed by Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand, and the delay is, therefore, condoned. Delay Condonation Application (CLMA) No.7399 of 2019 stands disposed of.
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.434 of 2017 dated 13.09.2017. The petitioner claims that he belongs to the "KHATIK" Caste which is a Scheduled Caste listed in terms of Article 340 of the Constitution of India. The Tehsildar, however, held that he belonged to the "GADARIYA" Caste, as per the revenue records of his grandfather; he belonged to the Other Backward Classes; and he was not entitled to be issued a Caste Certificates that he belonged to the Scheduled Castes
Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-writ petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. In order the under appeal, the learned Single Judge observed that new guidelines had been issued on 02.04.2013. The writ petition was disposed of directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's case afresh, as per the instructions dated 02.04.2013, within three months. Aggrieved thereby the present appeal.
Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, learned Counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, would submit that the instructions dated 02.04.2013 do not relate to the determination of the Caste status of individuals; it only contains details regarding the area, and the stage for being conferred such a benefit; and the order under appeal, therefore, necessitates interference.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, would draw attention of this Court to the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition, wherein it is stated that, if the petitioner is not satisfied with the conclusion, he could then make a representation before the Scrutiny Committee which was formed as per the decision of the Supreme Court in Km. Madhuri Patil. The Scrutiny Committee, as referred to in the counter affidavit of the respondent, is both at the District and at the State level.
Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that no useful purpose would be served in approaching the District Level Scrutiny Committee, since the said Committee has already decided the issue. As the dispute regarding the Caste status of the appellant-writ petitioner involves determination of disputed questions of fact, this Court would, ordinarily, not undertake such an exercise in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Suffice it, in such circumstances, to modify the order under appeal, and permit the appellant-writ petitioner to make a representation to the State Level Committee constituted by the State Government in terms of the Judgment of Supreme Court in Km. Madhuri Patil. In case, any such representation is made by the appellant-writ petitioner within one month from today, the State Level Committee shall considered the petitioner's claim, to belong to the Scheduled Castes, in accordance with law, pass a reasoned order thereupon and communicate the same to him at the earliest, and, in any event, within four months from the date of receipt of his representation.
The Special Appeal stands disposed accordingly. No costs.