AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner had filed writ petitions in W.P. Nos. 25672-673/2011 before this Court challenging the notice dated 5.2.2011 issued by the 2nd respondent directing the petitioner to appear before the Commission in connection with the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent. In the said cases, a contention was raised by the petitioner that the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Therefore, this Court has passed an order directing the 2nd respondent to consider the objection in relation to the jurisdiction and pass a reasoned order on its jurisdiction to deal with the matter. It has been observed as under:
Whereupon, the 2nd respondent shall consider the said objections and pass a reasoned order on its jurisdiction to deal with the matter. It is needless to observe that if the finding recorded goes against the petitioners, it will be open to them to challenge the same. At this stage, it is not necessary for this Court to interfere with the notice issued by the 2nd respondent Commission. All the contentions urged in the writ petitions are left open. Writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Perusal of the impugned order shows that the 2nd respondent has not framed any issue as directed by this Court.
Section 8 of Chapter 3 of the Karnataka State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2002 (for short ''the Act''), provides for functions of the Commission, which is as under:
Functions of the Commission: The functions of the Commission shall be as follows:
(a) to investigate and examine the working of various safeguards provided in the Constitution of India or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the Government for the welfare and protection of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka; and
(b) to inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguard of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka and to take up such matter with the appropriate authorities
The aforesaid provision does not authorize the Commission to decide the title dispute in respect of the immovable properties between the parties. The Commission ought to have taken note of the direction of this Court and decided its jurisdiction to deal with the matter as a preliminary issue. The order impugned is contrary to the direction of this Court. The Commission has to consider the matter afresh. In the result, the writ petition succeeds and it is accordingly allowed. The order at Annexure-G dated 11.9.2012 passed in Case No. 3/2011 by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 is hereby quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the matter afresh in the light of the observations made above and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. No costs.