IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4326 of 2003 Gita Rani Singh, wife of Sri Uma Shankar Singh (Daughter of Sri Onkar Ram), resident of Mohalla Sakari Gali, Shershah Road, P.S. Alamganj, P.O. Gulzarbagh, District- Patna --- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Kaimur(Bhabhua)--- Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Madhusudan Kumar, Adv. For the Respondents : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, G.A. 10, with Mr. Ritesh Kumar, A.C. to G.A. 10. ******* 11/ 13-12-2010 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition assailing the validity of the order dated 27.09.2001 (Annexure-1) passed in Misc. ( Caste Certificate) Case No. 34 of 2000-01 by respondent District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua), whereby he has refused to issue a caste certificate to the petitioner and has further cancelled the caste certificate issued in her favour by the B.D.O., Bhabua on 27.07.1983 and S.D.O., Bhabua on 16.05.1980. 3. Facts involved in the present writ petition may be put in a very narrow compass. The petitioner claims to be a person belonging to Kharwar caste and as such, a member of the Scheduled Tribe. She was originally belonging to the district of Varansi (U.P.) and was married with one Sri Uma Shanker Singh, resident of Mohalla 2 Sakarigali, Shershah Road, P.S. Alamganj, district Patna, about 30 years ago. Aforesaid Uma Shankar Singh is the original resident of district Kaimur. The petitioner claims to have submitted an application on 06.08.1999 before the respondent District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) for issuance of a caste certificate in her favour showing her to be a person belonging to Kharwar caste and a member of schedule tribe. Aforesaid claim was made mainly on the ground that her husband belongs to Kharwar caste. On the basis of aforesaid application filed by the petitioner, Misc. Case No. 34 of 2000-01 was started by the respondent- District Magistrate, whereafter by order dated 05.03.2001 (Annexure-3) an enquiry report was called for from the Anchal Adhikari, Bhabua. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Anchal Adhikari, Bhabua submitted his enquiry report on 12.06.2001 (Annexure-4) stating therein that petitioner was born in the district of Varansi and a caste certificate has been issued in favour of her father, Sri Onkarnath Rai, showing him to be a person belonging to Kharwar caste. On the basis of certain caste certificates issued in favour of the husband and father-in-law of the petitioner, the Anchal Adhikari appears to have recommended that a similar caste certificate may be issued to the petitioner. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite 3 the aforesaid enquiry report, the District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) by his impugned order dated 27.09.2001 has refused to issue a caste certificate showing her to be a person belonging to the Kharwar caste and a member of a schedule tribe. The further grievance of the petitioner is that without giving any opportunity of hearing, the previous caste certificate issued to her on 16.05.1980 by the S.D.O., and certificate dated 27.07.1983 issued by B.D.O., Bhabua have been cancelled and the petitioner has been directed to obtain the caste certificate from U.P., as she was originally belonged to that place. 5. A Counter- affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit have been filed on behalf of the respondents, disputing the entire claim of the petitioner. In the supplementary counter affidavit it has been asserted that father-in-law of the petitioner was ‘Kahar’ by caste and as such he was a member of extremely backward class. Placing reliance on a document, Annexure- C/2, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has tried to demonstrate that father-in-law of the petitioner has been recorded therein as ‘Hanuman Kahar’. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit and disputed the aforesaid facts and he claims that, in fact, neither the husband nor the father-in- law of the petitioner was having any land and, therefore, in 4 his submission, the claim of the respondent-State is not based on actual state of affairs. The very veracity of the document, as contained in Annexure-C/2, has been doubted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly placed reliance on a government circular dated 02.02.1982 issued by the Commissioner and Secretary of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Bihar, whereby the District Magistrates have been given power to issue caste certificate and income certificate for the purpose of applying in any government service. Certificate issued by the subordinate officer has been held to be not valid. Apparently there is no dispute that Kharwar caste has been included in the list of scheduled tribes. Only dispute is whether the petitioner belongs to Kharwar caste and as such a member of schedule tribe or she belongs to some other caste? In view of the disputed question of fact, this Court is of the considered opinion that the District Magistrate was obliged to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The evidence could have been led by the parties and after examining all those relevant documents, including Khatian etc., he could have come to a finding that whether petitioner belongs to the kharwar caste or belongs to some other caste. Furthermore, without giving an opportunity of 5 hearing to the petitioner, the District Magistrate could not have set aside the previous certificates issued by the Subordinate Officers showing the petitioner to be a person belonging to Kharwar caste. 8. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 27.09.2001 (Annexure-1) is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the District Magistrate , Kaimur, (Bhabua ) for passing a fresh speaking order regarding claim of the petitioner and counter claim of the respondents about the status of caste of the petitioner. The petitioner shall file a representation before the District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) within a period of one month from today with a certified copy of this order, where-after the District Magistrate shall examine all relevant documents produced by the parties and shall pass a speaking order as to whether the petitioner belongs to Kharwar caste or Kahar caste. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the genuineness or otherwise of the claim of the petitioner. This issue is required to be decided by the District Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties and after considering all the relevant materials. Entire exercise in the light of the present order must be completed by the District Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation 6 by the petitioner. The present writ petition stands disposed of with the observations and directions made above. No costs. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)