HI^H COURT OF CHH^TTIS^RH. BIL4SPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. DHIRENDRA MZSHRA & HON'BLE MR. R.N. CH^NDRAKAR. JJ W.A. No.323/09 (Writ Appeai u/s 2 (1) of the C.G. High Court (Appeai to OiviSion Bench) Aet,2036 APPELL^NT Petitioner RESPONDENTS Vs Deepak Khapekar, S/o Shriwan Khapekar, about 41 years, R/o 4A/Str, 52/5ector-8, Bhiiai, Durg (C6). 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Senerai Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Rdpur, (CG). 2. High Levei' Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee Through AAember and Jolnt &irector Pt« beendayal Upadhyaya Nagar Sector-4, Raipur (C.6.) 3, VigiJGnce Officer, Hlgh L-evei Caste Certjficate Scrutiny Committee Pt, Deendayal Upadhycxya Nagar Sector"4, i^alpur (C.O.) 4. Additional Chief Vigitence Offlcer And &.<5.M. (Viailance) Bhilai Steei' PIant, Ispat Bhawan, 8hibi\ Durg (C.G.) 5. Dy. Collsctor, Durg (C6) Pr@s@nt: AA.r. T.iC Tiwari, Advocate for the appeSbnt. Mr. Vinay Harit, Dy. Advocate 6enera! with Mr. S,K. Mishra, P,L for the State. ORAL JUD^MENT (03.12.2009) Dhirendra Mishra. J;- 1. Thss writ appeal is directed against the order dated 20J0.2009 passed jn W.P. (s) No.5951/2009 whereby the iearned Singie Jucig® has dismlssed the writ petition fited by the petitioner/appellant herein. 2, The petjtioner/appeiiant hereln has filed the aforesaid writ petition for quashing of the show-coiuse notice dated 9.9,2009 issued by respondent No.Z-HJah Level Caste Certjficate Scrutiny Committee on the groursd that the same has been 'issued on the basis of report submiti-ed by the respondent Additiond CoIIector. '^ 3. Mr* Tiwari, iearned counsel for the cxppeilant submits that the aforesaid notice has been issued on the basis of report of the Additionai' Colbctor, whereas, fhis Court vide order dated 233,2009 passed in VVP* (c) No,5975/07 had quashed the show-cause notice issued on the basis of reporr'of the AdditionaJ CoJIector reservjng 'iiberty to the respondents to forward the caste certificate to the rcspond'ent Hjgh Levei Caste Certificate Scrutinv Committee for verifjcation of the status of the appeilarit as per gu.ideSjnes bid down in Madhuri Patii's case (AIR 1995 SC 94). He further submits that respondent No.2 couid not have issued the aforesaid show cause notice onEy on the basis of report of the Additiona! Coiiector and Jt ought to have injtiated fresh enquiry. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appeliant. We have perused thc impugned order/earlier order passed'by this Hon'bb Court on 23,3.2009 as also show-cause notice and from perusal thereof it is evident-that the Caste Scrutjny Committee has been directed by this Court to decide the ^ocjal status of the appeilant hereih in accordance with the guidelines Jaid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil's after affording opporitunity? of hearing to the parties* 5. Taking into conslderation that the Caste Scrutiny Commsttee has already afforded the appeiJant an opportuni"iy to estabJJsh his sociaJ status by impuaned show notice, we find 1fiat the order passed by the teamed Singie Judge is strictly in accordance with the law and thesame does not caJI for anv interference* 6, In the result, we find no subs-tance in this writ appeal, the deserves to be dismis^ed and accordingly, it is dismissed. Rosh Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge