[W. ^r^ »t1 ^- '^^^ i^rO^'" . ^^'l^l^^--"' ^s1--"' ^^'""" ^h '— f r3-& IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (Q No" /200% PETITIONER .f Smt. Urmila Ekka, W/o. Shri Ashok Kumar Ekka, aged about 25 years, By caste-Uraon (ST), R/o. Village Budar (Dodhapara) Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^l) State of Chhattisgarh, acting through Secretary, Departraent of Tribal Welfare, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) :2) Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) .:3) Naib Tahsildar, Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) :4) Chief Executive Offlcer, Janpad Panchayat, Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF ^ APPROPmATE WRIT/WMTS, ORDER/ORDERS, DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS etc. ^."% HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.5791 OF 2008 PETITIONER Smt.Urmila Ekka ^ RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- 2. 3. Ms. Hamida Siddique, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 27th day of July, 2010) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Sub Divisional Officer by order dated 30-7-2008 (Annexure - P/1) declined to issue a permanent social status certificate in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has failed to produce the documents of her ancestors prior to 1950 being residents of Chhattisgarh. It would be proper that the aforesaid issue may be examined by the expert committee i.e. High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short "the Committee") about the fact of belonging of the petitioner to a particular community. For fhe reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition is disposed of with a liberty reserved to the petitioner to make an application before the Committee. If an application is made by the petitioner, the Committee is directed to consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, on its own merits and in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others , Director of Tribal Welfare, Government ofA.P. v. Laveti Giri and another^ and Gayatrilaxmi Bapurao Nagpure v. State of Maharashtra and Others^. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1 (1994)63cc241 2 (1995)48cc 32 3AIR1996SC1338