c^ -^ BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ( CHHATTISGARH ) W.P. (S) No^- / of 2009 PETITIONER Deepak Khapekar S/o Shriwan Khapekar, aged about41 years, R/o 4A/Str. 52/ Sector-8, Bhilai, Durg (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS ^1. ,\^> ^'%;..%...--" o^:y -2. ^o*' '^ ^'^'?:'.. <^ ^^ :'^' State of Chhattisgarh through -the Secretary, General Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur ( C G ) High Level Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee through Member and Joint Director Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar Sector- 4, Raipur (C.G.) Vigilance Officer High Level Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar Sector-4, Raipur (C.G.) Additional ChiefVigilance Officer and D.G.M. (Vigilance) Bhilai Steel Plant, Ispat Bhawan, Bhilai, Durg(C.G-) 5. Dy. Collector Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 4. -o HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRTT PETEriON (S) No. 595 1 of2009 PETmONER RE8PQNDENTS Deepak Kliapekar. VERSU8 State ofChhattisgarh & Others. Ijil ^ i it </" WRITPETmQN UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA SB: Hon»bleShri Satish K. Asnihotri, J. Present: Shri T.K.Tiwad, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri N.Naha Roy, Panel Law^rer forthe State/respondent No. lto3&5. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 20 day ofOctober, 2009) 1. The petitioner has approached this Court earlier also questionmg the authority ofthe respondents to refer the matter to the Deputy Collector for enquiring into the socialstatus ofthe petitioner in Writ Petition (S) No. 3478 of 2006, Writ Petition No. 2726/2006 and Writ Petition (C) No. 5975 of 2007. This Coml, on 23rd March, 2009, obsen'ed that the respondents shall be at liberty to fonvard the caste certificate to the Hi^i Level Caste Scmtiny Committee (for short 'the Conmiittee'), for verification ofthe caste status offhe petitioner as per guidelines laid down in Kii. Madhuri Patil & another v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Devehpment & Others1 case. 2. It appears that the case has been accordingly referred to the Committee. The Committee, by notice dated 09th September, 2009 (Annexure P/7) has directed the petitioner to appear bsfore the Committee alongwith necessarv' documents on 26th October, 2009. The petitioner feels aggrieved by this notice without any reason and has filed tiiis petition 1 (1994) 6SCC 241 N/- prayingthat the notice be quashed because the notice is on the basis of the report submitted by the Dq^uty Collector. Be Ifaat as it may, this Court in W.P. No. 2726/2006 has ah-eady made clear that the Committee shall decide the matter after afibrding opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with the guidelines laid down mMadhuri PatiFs case. Thus, there is no point at this stage to consider the same issue again. The Committee is under an obligation to decide the matter in accordance with law and guidelines as laid down by the Supreme Court m Madhuri Patil (supm) and subsequently m other decisions. Atthis stage, it is not necessaryto go intothe details ofthe case. Ifthere is any illegality or irregularity in the decision ofthe Coimmttee, the petitioner may take recourse to any fomm, if so advised, that may be available to the petitioner, in accordance with law. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Aimt