•?''*t ^ BEFORE THE H.P. STATE ADMINISTR&TIVE TRIBiraAL BENCH AT RAIPUR (M.P.) ^^fy ^X^^osT O.A. N0. /2000 APPLICANT s RESPONDENTS:- : BRIJ RAM BHARIA, AGE 33 YEARS S/o BACHAN SAI R/o Village— Kendaikhar Tahsil - Katghora, Distt. Bilaspur (M.P_,_) VERSOS 1. State of H.P. Through The Secretary, Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes DeveloOpment Department, Vallabh Bhavan, Bhopal (M.P.) 2. The Collector, Tribal Vielfare and Development, Bilaspur (Tt.P. ) 3. Block Education Officer, Pondi-Uprora, Distt. Bilaspur (M.P.) 4.Assistant Commissioner, Tribal VJelfare and Development, Bilaspur (M.P^_i ORIGINAL &PPLICATION UNDER SECTION 1-9 OF THE M.P. STATE ADttINISTRATIVE TRIBHNAL ACT, 1985. liiamintninffiTi'miirt-rfn "^': 4 ^^ ?t HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH: BILASPl« SmdfrBenchLUon'bte Shrt Manindra NohanShrivartaia^A ApBlfcant Rfiaoonitente WCTT PETITION ffil N0^2120005 BrgRanBharia Vwiw Stato of M.P. and othara Preaenfc- Shri Manish Sharma, counsel fw the pettttoner. Svi Afvihd Dubey, Ranel Lawyer for the State. ORALORDER (Pw—don aite KTdtv^Nwch, 2010) With ttie consent of teamed counael fcr Bw parttes, the petNtonjs heaid finaNy. (2) By thB Radtion, prt|iongf <^ h^^^<^^ << "der datBd O7.<)4-1998 (Ann^re A4) paN^^by the^ ^ Tribal Dewtopment, Bitaspur, ty which^ tha servl^ alcng wHh 18 olher AsaiBtant Teachera have been terminated. Vkte ontor datad OMM8^B(Anneiain A-1), peBBimer was apppinted »Lcn^^^^^ I^trict Co-coonBnator, Tribal Wdfare, to CgBectpr, BMasew. PBIU^^ ws setectod on the basis of he betongjr^ to "Bltauto" fti>e. P^j|ipner ctanns that he betongs to "Bharia" fribe. Certificate to that effect was abo teued ,(»y Ihe Teh^dar, Ka(Bhora on '26^7-1986(AnneMjre A-18) ttat ||B»foner Mongs to "Bharia" tribe and resldent of Kendaikhar, Tfllhsfl l^llB^cira, ^trict M about 2 & % yeare ofhisappojnlmert^RetlBonerreceMBda show cauae noCce on 15<2- 1999 (^ne^ig A-?) issued bytti»,Co|(^^ reqwnng the pdiUonerto show cause as to why ReUjoner's sa^ces be mrttenm^^ as upon enquiry, it was fbund that the petjU^er procuredjBgmment ti^^ on the basis of -2-— ^^ talse certBteate of he betonflinfl ID "Bharia" tribe wherew peUBoner casto is "Bhoria" sub cast!B<rfcB^e "Kpshta" mainlyenBaged hithe vocatfen ofwa^ng. The said nottee stated Ihat ^pi^yiM^«K.K^teJb»_pmUh^unttor Madhya Pradwh CivU ServicaB (CtesiBcatun, Cpntrol & Apped) Rutos, 1986, in addtUonto criminal acUon. In response to the said noUce, a reply along wBh supportmg documents was submittod by the petittoner. PfWonw submttted number of documents to estaNish that petiUoner betonas to "Bharia" tribe. Prtitioner placsd reliance on dqc|ima^ to A-23) in order to demonslrate that a vald and proper <aste cwtilScatB was issued in hfe favour by the competent aulhprity in view of fte various dirocBons and (natrucUoin of <he flovemment and (he other authoriUes of ths State Govt and ofter diatrict lewl authoriUes. (3) Annexure A-3 is the certNcirte of rttendance to show that the petitioner appeared b^^ IheAsa^art Comirissfoner, Tribd DavBtopment, Bilaspur on 04-03-1999. Howwer, the Cdtoc^passed.the ImRW"^ w^ on 07-04-1999 (Annexure A^t), by whirti, senrices of the p^HIOner atong wlth other 18 Assistant Teachera were terminatod by hoMing Uwit his •xptanatfon wa» not found safisliBctory and tt was fouml (hat the pe^^ hinmelf a "Bharia"tribe whereas he doe»not betors to the sakt tribe. ^fthe bnpugned order.fte Coltoctqr ordered to reflistar criminal case against the pdWoner. bythest^of^<rftoiminaUon, petNioner pnferred an apped bdbre the Commissfoner on 25<M-1999(Annexure A-24), on which, no axSon was taken. (4) Leamed coureel <w the petUqner argued that the enUre proceedmgs are iltogal, wtthput junstBcfipn and authorty of taw in utter violafion of pmicipleB of ^ •3>- natural jus^ and wHhoutdue consktoration of material placed on record bythe petiUoner. It is ateo argued ttiatin viewof the ju<tonent of the Suprwne Court in the case of Ku. Madhuri PaW and anothar vs. AddWomri Commfasfoner, Tribal Dwetoimient »irfottif^,AIR19WS.C. 94, Vm CvMoctof wMs sub- ordinates had no authority to hdd and enquiry into the <aste status <rf the petitfoner as the Stato Lwel Casto SCTuUny CommBtoe atone had juriscHctton and competence to hold such an en<(uiiy and give a dedaratfon regarding the adual stsrtus of the peUfipner. In hjssubmissfon, if at all, there was any such complaint.ths matter ought to have been referred to the State Level Caste Scrutiny CommiUee for enquiiy which has not been done. (5) On the other hand, teamedcounsel (or the rwponctents subnrts that the peUtioner prqcyred appointmant on the post of Assistant Teacher whteh was reseived for Scheduted Tribe candidate, though the peUtioner dtd not betong to "Bharia" tribe. It is sutMnUtod thatths govwnment issued an ordw on 29^5-1998 (Annexure R-^ to the CoUector, BUaspur totake acUwi ^iinstthose who are fatsely claiming stotus of "Bharei" tribe in l^rtghora'area <rf the District. Bf the said order, the CoBector was directBd to take acUon for cancellatfon of casts certifcate issued in favour of ftose pereons who betonged to "Bhoria" sub-caste of cast®"Koshta" butobtained falsa certfficates ctoclaring them s»betoi^ng to "Bharia" tribe. Thereafter, ttie Sid» [Xvlsional OSScw (Rwenue), Ksrtghora submitted a reporton 2&-10-1998 to the CommiMtoner wherein it was stated that 19 cases of such fabe daim wwe found. A Ust <rf 18 persons whom fte S.D.O. has found not beloiigingtD 'Bharia" tribe, was annexed along wBh ttie said enquiry repprt dated 2MO-1W8 (Aimexure R-1). TOs induded ttie name of the petittoner ateo. Thweafter, the Commfeswner, Bilaspur difected the CoNector vide his memo dated 3(M)1-1889 (Annexure R-2) to take actfon againstthose 19 '"•^ss^ s ^- ^' Assistant Teachers by tenniiraUng their seivfces, who talsely obtained Ihe caste certificate. It is submitted that show cause notice vns given to the petiUonar and after gh/ii^ Wm proper opportynity qf hearmg and cpmii^i tothe coroliBion that th®petltroner dkl not b^ongto the "Bharia" tribe, his senrices were tBmiinated. (6) I have considered rhal submissions made by teamed counsel for <he partiesand perused the records. (7) It is no tongsr res inteva.h} view ofthe setUed tegal posiUon that the juriscBdfon to detennine caste status vests only wilh the Stata Level Caste Scrufiny Gommittee consUtuted imder the direcUons pfthe Supreme Court in the case of Ku. Madhuri Patil (supra). Ifthwe was any doutrt or complaint wtth regard to caste stalus of the p^troner, it was obligatoiy on the part of the respondent-Collecfa>r to referthe case of the petltronsrto the State Lwel Caste ScruBny CommUtee for consideralion and not to usurp jurisdicUon to decide the issue, for which, he hadno competence. (8) Consequently, lam unabte to uphold the unpiiywd order of termhatfon dated 07-04-1999 (AnnexureA^)pa»ed by ttie Collector, Bitepur and the same is declared illegal and is hereby srt aade. The respondwrt-Coltoctor is directed to refer the case of the peUUoner to the State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee for determination of petUioner's caste status. The Cottector shaU make such reference to the State Level Casts Scrutiny Commiltee at ths aarliast and not tater than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this wder. If it is ultimatefy found Ihatthe petifioner bdongs to "Bharia" tribe, respondents shall rein^ate,the peUtfoner in seivice mth all consequertial benefits pay, perte and seniority. As the peUfoner is out cf emptoyment since 07-04-1999, it is directed that the State Level Caste ScruUny Committee shall condude its enquiry in the ^\ :''-"-.i:.i^. ^f ^ -S' case of the peBioner as expediBouslY as po^Ue and all wicteayour shall be made to comptetethe same wiftin af^od <^^x t^the petitfoner. (9) tn view offttregoing, ths peUtion »altowsd to theextent indfcated above. There shall be no orders as to cost Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge