\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION [CI No. [€31 OF 2009 PETITIONER : Ramlal, o Chandrabhan, aged about 60 years, R/o Village Podishankar, Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir Champa (CG). W Versus /, 1. State of Chhattisgarh I Through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, w i Raipur, Chhattisgarh. / 2. Collector, District Janjgir — Champa (CG). RESPONDENTS : // 3. Sub‘ Divisional Officer (ReVenue), District Janjgir — Champa (CG). / 4. Bullu Ram Namdeo, S/o Ramadhar‘, aged not known, R/o village. Podishankar, Tahsil‘ Champa, District Janjgir — Champa (CG). ¢ .22? RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22'i OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA S/ W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 1691 0f2009 PETITIONER : Ramlal. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. ' Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Pane] Lawyer forvthe State/respondent No. 1 to 3. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 24t day of September, 2010) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 14.7.2008 (Annexure P/l) passed by the Additional Collector, Janjgir-Champa in Appeal Case No. 4/B-12l/07-08 whereby the order dated 15.11.2007 (Annexure P/2) of the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) (for short ‘the SDO’) Champa, in Revenue Case No. 04B/12l/2006—07 has been affirmed, holding that the petitioner does not belong to Shikari caste, a scheduled tribe and thus, he was held as not entitled to hold the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Podishankar, reserved for a scheduled tribe (for short ‘the S.T. ’) candidate and the / petitioner was suspended from the post of Sarpanch under section 39 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short ‘the Adhimy'am, 1993 ’). The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner are that the post of Sarpanch in village Panchayat, Podishankar, Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, was reserved for a scheduled tribe candidate. The petitioner submitted his nomination form and after contesting the election which was held in the year 2005, was elected for the post of \ \\)\O Sarpanch. The respondent No. 4, preferred an application before the SDO i.e. the respondent N0. 3, alleging that the petitioner does not belong to ST category, to Which the petitioner submitted his reply. The SDO, Without appreciating the reply, passed the impugned order dated ‘15.1 12007 (Anxure P/2) , olding that the petitioner does not belong to Shiri a no it S a . ne h ka cste and thus, is t entled to hold the post of arpanch, nd further suspended the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch, Gram anchayat, Podishankar, und section 39 of the Adhiniyam, 1993. Being agrieved, the petitioner pferred an appeal befo th Collector, Jajgi- is d 0 i pad S earned counse apparing for the petitioner submits that the authorities belo could not have decided the social status of the petitioner as the Hig Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (fbr short ‘the Committee ’ alon is compent to consider and determine the same. Thus, the impugned orders re bad in law. He relies on a decision of the Sureme Court in K m l Dvet & n Prk Babullsingh arma & Anrz in suport of his contention. aash a Pr p On the other handg/ Shri Baduri, learned counsel ppearing for the Ste/responden No. l 3 bmits that it is‘ not n dispute tat the petitioner belongs to Shikari caste which falls unde ST category. However, the benefit of his ‘caste certificate could not have been availed by the petitioner for the‘District Janjgir-Champa wherein the said caste has not been notified as ST. P er g re re e nr Champa, which was also dismsed Vide order ated 14.7.2008, confrming the order sse by the .D.0. L l e w h ) e a p umari Madhuri Patil & another v, Add]. Comissioner, Triba elopmen Others], and i the case State of Mharashtra v. Ravi R 10994) 6 scc 241 \ 2 2006 AIR scw 6093 / / te /V : h a tat to su i h r x1\\ 5. The Supreme Court, in Ravi Prakash (supra), has clearly held that the dispute with regard to the caste of a person can be decided by the Committee alone. The Supreme Court has further given the procedure asto how the Committee should decide the dispute. In View of well settled principle of law, the SDO has exceeded his jurisdiction in declaring the fact that the petitioner was not a member of scheduled tribe. 6. In View of the foregoing, the impugned orders dated 14.7.2008 (Annexure P/l) and 15.11.2007 (Annexure P/2) are set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent No. 3 for deciding the matter afresh after determination of the caste of the petitioner by the Committee. The respondent No. 3 is accordingly directed to refer the matter to the Committee for their decision in accordance with law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ku. Madhuri Patil (supra) and Ravi Prakash (supra). In View of the fact that election has taken place in the year 2005 and the same was set aside on 15.11.2007, it is expected that the Committee shall decide the dispute with regard to social status of the petitioner, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months. 8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the above extent and the matter 1s remitted back to‘th‘e‘respondent No. 3 for fresh adJudlcation, 1n th light of the above-stated direction. There shall be no order asto costs. e Sdl— i Satish K. Agnihotri l Judge