IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7479 of 2010. Date of Decision : June 28, 2011 Jagdish Chand … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondents: Mr. R. K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. and Mr. J. K. Verma, Dy. A.G. Justice Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That respondents may kindly be directed to correct the caste of the petitioner in the revenue record of Mauza Chowki, Tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. as ‘Koli’ against the wrongly recorded as ‘Rajput’ with all consequential benefits. (ii) That the entire record of the case may very kindly be summoned from the respondents for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. (iii) That any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may be passed Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.” 2. From the averments made by the respondents it is quite evident that caste of the petitioner i.e. ‘Rajput’, instead of ‘Koli’ was recorded during the consolidation operation conducted in muhal Chowki by the Settlement Officer. Following is the reason , so stated by the respondents, for the same:- “… That the contents of para No. 2 of the petition are admitted to the extent that the petitioner is son of Shri Lobhi Ram son of Malagar. But it is not admitted that the predecessors of the petitioner were residents of two villages namely mauza Chowki and Behl prior to Settlement, as is evident from the pedigree table of 1964-65 the caste of predecessors of the petitioner was recorded as “Koli-Gharu” but their entry is not found in the revenue record of muhal Behl so it is not admitted that the caste of the petitioner is recorded as “Koli” in revenue villages of both muhals. In this context, it is submitted that the caste of the predecessors of the petitioner was recorded as “Koli-Gharu” in muhal Chowki prior to Settlement and during Settlement it is recorded as “Koli Soundal” in muhal Behal and “Rajput (Koli)-Soundal” in muhal Chowki. Further it is recorded as “Rajput Soundal” during Consolidation Operation in muhal Chowki. However, it is admitted that the caste of the predecessors of the petitioner was changed during the Settlement Operation but in this 3 context, it is pertinent to mention here that caste of any person is recorded in the revenue record as per the information and record supplied to the concerned Patwari by the person concerned as it was recorded in the previous muhal and Patwari himself is not competent to record caste of the person by his own choice. …” 3. In the background in which the caste of the petitioner was allegedly wrongly recorded in the revenue record, it is only appropriate that petitioner takes up the matter with the Consolidation Officer for rectification of the same, since the record was prepared during the process of consolidation operation at the time of settlement. Upon receipt of communication from the petitioner the concerned Consolidation Officer shall decide the petitioner’s case expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months. Needless to add all concerned shall be associated. 4. Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. June 28, 2011 (PK)