f BEFORE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^ W.P.(C)NO. a^ /2oii Shiate Bendh PETTTION.ER : Naamdev Bansod ,0 S/o.- late Shri Lattaroo Bansod, Aged 5\rL?-;"'$"§^ about 46 years, R/o.- Raza Chowk, Ward no.25, Gazi Nagar, Birgaon District Raipur (C.G.) •^y-y^^. '.'?-^A'v-/i"\.--' 'i7^-\.W^'>"& \..." 'y"w;^'ri^>"~ ,^y^^' >.^v ^ A-..*'* VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1)Stat.eofChhattisgarh Through the Secretary Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribe, Tribal Welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) 2) Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3) Chhattisgarh State Scheduled Caste Commission, Saakcharta Chowk, Police Head Quarters, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE'^26 OF THE CONSTITUTIO_N OF INDIA. PETITIONER HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHj BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.3395 OF 2011 Naamdev Bansod Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Anup Mazumdar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General for the State. Shri V.R. Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent No.3 ORDER itfT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Gowri (Passed on this 13"' day ofOctober, 2011) Heard learned counsel forthe parties. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the competent officer i.e. Sub Divisional Officer, Raipur, granted permanent caste certificate in favour of the petitioner i.e. Naamdev Bansod, S/o Late Shri Lattaroo Bansod, on 16-9-2003 (Annexure - P/2). Thereafter, when the petitioner made an application for grant of permanent caste certificate in favour of his son & daughter namely; Kripashankar Bansod & Ku. Aarju Bansod, the Sub Divisional Officer, on certain grounds, which have been considered by this Court in a catena of decisions that the documents alone are not conclusive evidence for grant of certificate, rejected the application for grant of social status certificate in favourofthe children ofthe petitioner. The stand of the Sub Divisional Officer is contrary to the facts. If the petitioner belongs to a particular caste, his children cannot be denied the certificate of belonging to the same caste/community. Thus, the impugned orderdated 15-3-2011 (Annexure - P/1) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer(Revenue), Raipur, in revenue case No.1669/ B-121/year2010-11 is quashed. The Sub Divisional Officer is directed to re-consider the application of the petitioner in the light of well settled principtes of law and further that the petitioner was granted caste certificate 'earlier, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks. As an upshot, the writ petition is ailowed. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge :1e.