§iGii €017§T GF CiiiiATTi§GAKfi AT 3 “\x TLA§PITR W.F.{Si Kc. 2:?67i20f)$ Saida Khanarn ?ETiTfGWR Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others §ESF§I¢EEWTS Ord€r gost far V3 — 12-12008 ‘ 1 5d]— Dhirendra Mishra Judge W.P.iS‘! $0. 2367Z20G8 W1??? PETiTiéii WhER ARTiCiE 226 6F THE Cfxfv'STITUTidH u? IRDEA Shri Anoop Majumdar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Dy. Advocate General for the tate/reepoadent Ne. 1. Shri AbhiSek Sinha, Adv. for the respondent No. 2. e R n E R {19—12—2008) §i1irentira Eiishra. J. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for following reliefs:- S ETT‘I‘TGNER Saida Khanaxn, Djo Shri M.G. Khan, aged about 24 years, R/o Charch Read, Ambagarh Chowki, Distt. Rajnanc‘igaon ICG) EE$WW§EWTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Seei‘etaxiy’, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2. Chairman, Chhattisgarh eiectricity > Board, Raipur, DiStt. Raipur 3. Raipur (CG) Joint Director, Tribal Research and "Framing Irxetitutimi, Raipur (State Le‘Jel HiNh Power Cagte Veriiication Committee), Distt. Raipur (CG) 4. State Level High Power Caste Scrutiiiy Cemmittee, through its: Director, Umversity Campus, Raipur (CG) “1. That, the State Levei High Powar . Caste Verification Committee may be tiirected t0 verify and affirm the Caste Certiticate of “Momin Julaha”, as Other Backward Ciass Category issued to the > petitioner by the competent authority and without compelling her to produce the documents prior to year 1970 of her forefathers. 2. That, the Respondent Authorities may be directed to give appointmentto the petitioner on the post of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) in the State Eiectricity Board as per her selection/appointment order under Other Backward Class category. '3’ That, the respondents may be directed to not to proceed with further appointments of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) with further appointments of Assistant Engineer {Trainee} Without considering the 1 appointment of the petitioner.” 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that she was selected for appointment on the post of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) in ' the State Electricity Board, however Vide order of Annexure P—2, she was directed to submit following documents by 10th of August, 2007:— (i) Certificate from SCfST/OBC High Power Verification Committee regarding verification of PCC submitted by her. (ii) Final year marksheet. $ f4 {iii} PCC from Home district duly verified from SC/ ST/OBC High Power Veritication Committee. (iv) ‘ Domicile certificate in CG format. 3. The peiitioner approached the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification of her caste certificate, however the respondent No. 4 demanded 1and records and school certificatee of her forefathers prior to year 1970 and for non—submission of the same. her caste certificate was not verified. She filed a writ petition against the demand of land records prior to year 1970, however the petition was dismissed as premature as no order was passed on her application. 4. During the course of argument, Shri Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, apprised that she had preferred Writ Appeal No. 56/2008 against the order dated 7—2—2008 passed in W.P.(S) No. 56'7j200‘7, however the same was dismissed as withdrawn with libertv of tiling another writ petition challenging the action of the respondent No. 3 in not passing any order on the appellant’s reply dated 12-2—2008 inspite of lapse of a period of more than two months, though the petitioner has not disclosed filing of writ appeal and its dismissal with the ‘ aforesaid libertV: 4 ? g- 5‘ No return has been f11ed by other re$ponc1ents except the respondent No. 2’Electricity Board. 6. The responoient No. 2-Electricity Boarc‘l in its return, has submitted that the ciirection for appointment on a ‘particulaf poet under a paxticular reserved category cannot be issued; the petitioner cannot be granted benefit of reservation uniess her social status is verifiec‘l’ by a competent authorityjoommittee ami the canciio‘late’s domicile of the State of Chhattisgarh; the respondent in order to ensure that oniy genuine‘persons are extended benefit of reservation, made it compulsory production of social status certiiicate duly veritied by the State Level High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee and candidates were allowed to submit the same by 10th August, 2007 and the order of appointment made it clear that failure to submit the same would automatically lead to cancellation of candidature for appointment to’ the post of Assistant Engineer {Trainee} Since the petitioner did not submit the said certificate, the candidature of the petitioner against O.B.C. category stands cancelled; the recruitment process has already completed in April, 2008 and fresh recruitment process has been commenced and vacancies advertised by the Electricity Board in the present case have been filled in; ,4 v V l J i l l $% the petitioner has. hemeh‘ submitted application un&er the unreserved category in the second recruitment process and, therefore, in these circumstances, She is not entitled for any relief as against the respondent No. 2. ‘7. Shri Anoop Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, vehemently argued that the demand of land records prior to year 1970 by the respondent No. 4 is contrary to the various circulars issued by the State from time to time. Her application for verification of the caste certificate issued by a competent authority is not being disp0sed of by the State Level High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee on one pretext or the other. The petitioner has already submitted her reply on 12-2-2008 (Annexure P—6) to the memo dated 5—9—2007 (Annexure Ps3), whereby land records prior to 1970 have been demanded and categorically stated that the documents demanded do not exist and, therefore, the same could not be produced, however, even after her reply dated 12—2-2008, the Caste Scrutiny Committee has not decided and verified her caste certiflcate issued by a competent authority even after lapse of a period of more than lO months. Referring to the judgment of ’Elfadhuri ?a.tii’s case (AIR 1995 SC 94), it was argued that Where certificate of a candidate is under /W I scrutiny of High Fewer Caste Scrutiny Committee, such cand'idate may be provisionally appointed on the selected noet till the Committee verifies ancl submits its report. 8. 'On the other hand, Shri Abhighek Sinha, learnal counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2—Electricity Board, opposed the prayer on the ground taken in the return and submitted that so far as the relief claimecl by the petitioner against the respondent No. 2-Elect1‘-icity Board is concerned. the Same has become infructuoue as the appointment of the petitioner stands automatically ' cancelled and the vacancies advertised by the Board in the present case, stand filled in. 9, l have heard learned counsel for the parties. 10. The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner based ' on the same cause of action was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 7-2~2008 with an observation that “the petition is premature as no final order has been passed which could be impugned in this petition, invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India”. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed and the interim relief granted earlier was discharged. produced the order dated 22M April, 2008 passed in WA. No. 56/2008 against the order dated 7—2—2008 and from perusal of the same, it is evident that the same was dismissed as Withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner of filing another writ petition chalienging the action of the respondent No. 3 i.e. State Level High Power Caste Verification Committee in not passing any order on the appellant’s reply inspite of lapse of a period of more than 2 months . 12. In View of the uncontroverted averments in the return of the respondent No. 2 and also in View of the fact that the dismissal of earlier writ petition of the petitioner as against the respondent No. 2—Electricity Board has attained finalitv. no direction can be issued to the respondent No. 2 as prayed by the petitioner in the instant petition. 13. However, taking into consideration that the matter pertaining to verification of caste certificate is pending before the respondent'no. 4 for more than a vear: the t petitioner has already expressed her inability to produce the land records prior to the year 1970 detailed in document of Annexure P—S Vide her reply dated 12—2e2008 of Annexure P—6, the instant petition is disposed of with I é? h‘berty to the petitioner to approach the respondent No. 4 Within a period of 2 weeks from today anci produce all the evicience to establish her social status. Considering the long pendency of verification of the caste certificate of the petitioner, the responolent No. 4 is further directed to give decision in the matter of verification of the caste certificate of the petitioner within a further period of 3 months from the date the petitioner appears before the respondent No. 4—Committee. if not aiready decided. 14. The, petition is accordingly disposed of. 15. No orders as to cost. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra ‘ Judge ' < K d