IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHI-IATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.(Ci No‘ibg /201,1, , / 1. Ku. Sunita Nag D/o Gheenaram Nag Aged about 31 years, / 2. Shyamsunder Nag S/o Gheenaram Nag, Aged about 28 years. PETITIONERS: oth are R/ o Village 8s Post— Dahikonga, Tahsil—Kondagaon, Districta Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS 1. / State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Mantralaya Raipur, (C.G‘) RESPONDENTS: High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Through the Chairman Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) Tribal Research and Training nstitute, Raipur Through its Joint Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute, Raipur (C.G.) The Collector Place Jagdalpur, Distt—Bastar, (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:— B I Q.)NVQ6S‘W\ W 200 mmffwm *mm SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan 02-02-2011 Shri Janak Hidko, counsel for Shri Arvind Dubey, Pane! Li advance copy. Heard. Case of the petitioners is that and are possessed of permanent Divisional Officer (Revenue), Kon certmed as belonging to “Dorla" tri which stand in the name of father mentioned, however, in the old reve i been mentioned as “Dora”. in reven of the petitioners has been shown the petitioners made representation at Jagdalpur for necessary corre discrepancy in the records. in ord approached the caste scrutiny c issue caste certificate in a presc committee has not responded nor prescribed format by undertaking s in this background, the pet praying that direction may be issued verification and scrutiny ofthe caste if in the revenue records, cas mentioned “Dorla" tribe, it is for h Shrivastava J. the petitioners. awyer for the State/respondents on the petitioners beiongs to “Doria" tribe caste certmcate issued by the Sub dagaon, in which, they have been De. However, in the revenue records of the petitioners, “Dorla” has been nue records, caste of forefathers has ‘e records of subsequent years, father befonging to “Doria” tribe. Father of n 27-07-2010 to the Coileotor, Bastar tion of the records on account of r to clear the cloud, the petitioners ttee for scrutiny of their caste and ibed format but the caste scrutiny did they issue caste certificate in a ny and verification. ioners have approached this Court to respondent authorities to make due ertificate of the petitioners. e of father of the petitioners has been to take recourse to such remedy as {wt-a strait o c i i i may be available to him under the petitioners, this Court cannot issue ar Though an averment has be! have approached Caste scrutiny coi application was submitted before ti verification and scrutiny of their cast be issued to the caste scrutiny com lt would be open for the peti the High Power Caste Scrutiny Co the same on its own merits, in acco With the aforesaid observati law and on the petition fried by the ty direction. an made by the petitioners that they nmittee but it is not stated that any ie caste scrutiny committee seeking e, therefore, no specific direction can tee. oners to make representation before t‘tee, and the committee shall decide ce with law. the petition is iinally disposed off. \Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge [11% airy} m r o 't i n