CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.3901 OF 2005 In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ---------- JAGDISH PRASAD BAISHANTRI S/O LATE KULDEEP PRASAD BAISHANTRI R/O MOHALLA, ALINAGAR, WARD NO.-1, PS- DARBHANGA PO-LALBAGH DISTT.- DARBHANGA AT PRESENT WORKING ASLECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, B.R.B.COLLEGE,SAMASTIPLUR----- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DARBHANGA 3. PRAKHAND VIKAS PADHADHIKARI, DARBHANGA SADAR 4. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DARBHANGA, SADAR 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SAMASTIPUR ---------- For The Petitioner : MR. PAWAN KUMAR MISHRA, ADVOCATE For The Respondent :AAG2 --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ******* A.K.Tripathi,J. Vide order dated 10.3.2005 passed by the District Magistrate, Darbhanga the caste certificate certifying the petitioner to be a “Dhobi” and therefore scheduled caste has been ordered to be annulled. This order of annulment has consequence for the petitioner because based on the caste certificate he has got employment as a lecturer under Lalit Narayan Mithila University. The background to the present dispute is that certain complaints were lodged both with the University Authority as well other authority raising serious doubt about the caste certificate which had been issued in favour of the petitioner certifying him to be a “Dhobi” and therefore a Scheduled caste. There is even allegation that the petitioner’s present name and parentage is assumed one obtained with the object of deriving the benefit of reservation. He originally belongs to Araria district and some kind of enquiry thereafter came to be done. - 2 - From a perusal of annexure-7 it is apparent that the enquiry report dated 6.11.2004 of the Block Development Officer, Raniganj, was forwarded to the District Magistrate coupled with a communication issued by the District Magistrate, Araria which forced the hands of the District Magistrate, Darbhanga to issue the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner categorically states in the writ application specially in paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 that all these exercises have been done by the respondent authority without giving him any opportunity of hearing as well as furnishing him the material based on which the decision has been reached. The order has serious civil consequence for him and the same could not be passed without following the rules of natural justice. In the counter affidavit there are many averments and pleadings to justify the order passed in this case but there is no denial of the fact whether the petitioner was actually given an opportunity of hearing in this regard. In absence of any contradiction of the stand taken by the petitioner, this Court comes to an opinion that a kind of prejudice has been caused to the petitioner by not giving him an opportunity of hearing before passing of the order contained in annexure-7. This writ application is allowed on this score alone. Annexure-7 is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the - 3 - District Magistrate, Darbhanga who shall issue notice to the petitioner, furnish him the materials based on which the order in this regard ought to be passed. Since the matter relates to the year, 2005, therefore it will be in the interest of justice that if the petitioner cooperates the entire exercise will be done within four months from the date of communication or production of a copy of this order. This writ application is allowed to the extent indicted above. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.) Patna High Court, Patna Dated the 9th January, 2009 NAFR (RPS)