IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6160 of 2011 Mobarak Hussain, S/o Late Heyatan Mian, resident of village- Birhima, P.S. Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur. . . . . . .Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Panchyati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate-cum-Election Officer, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Block Development Officer, Motipur, District Muzaffarpur. 5. The Circle Officer, Motipur, District Muzaffarpur. 6. The Returning Officer (Panchayat), Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur. . . . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 4/ 23.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The instant writ application has been filed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No.02 dated 10.03.2011 by which the Returning Officer (Panchayat), Motipur rejected the candidature of the petitioner for contesting the Panchayat Election, 2011. The petitioner also prays for quashing Caste Certificate, as contained in Annexure-6, granted by Circle Officer, Motipur, Muzaffarpur dated 07.02.2011. The petitioner along with others filed nomination papers for election to the post of Mukhia of Gram Panchayat, Ibrahimpur under Motipur Block in the district of Muzaffarpur. The period for filing of nomination paper was upto 07.03.2011 from 28.02.2011. The petitioner even represented before the Collector, Muzaffarpur on 03.03.2011 for his caste certificate, in spite of that he did not receive any caste certificate. He further submits that subsequently the Circle Officer, Motipur suo motu prepared a caste certificate, as contained in Annexure-6, and attached to the nomination paper. He further submits that he does 2 not belong to the Extremely Backward Class category. Counsel for the State submits that it would appear from the impugned order that the nomination paper was rejected, as the petitioner had not attached the caste certificate, which was mandatory. He further submits that Ibrahimpur Gram Panchayat is a reserved Panchayat and survey khatian shows that the petitioner belongs to Sheikh caste, which comes under general category. He controverts the submission of the petitioner that the caste certificate was attached by the Circle Officer, Motipur, Muzaffarpur in a slip-shod manner to the nomination paper of the petitioner. He submits that in fact the caste certificate (Annexure- 6) has been issued to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that he did not get the caste certificate and as such could not attach the same with the nomination paper and the caste certificate is necessary for declaring validity of the nomination paper. In this view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. The next issue is whether the caste certificate was surreptitiously attached to the nomination paper by the Circle Officer, Motipur, as claimed by the petitioner. The allegation has been opposed by the State. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I observe that if the petitioner files a representation before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Muzaffarpur, regarding the alleged 3 insinuation against the Circle Officer, Motipur, Muzaffarpur, he would enquire into the matter. In case, if the allegations made by the petitioner is not find out to be correct, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Muzaffarpur will be at liberty to proceed against him as well. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the caste certificate in which he has been shown to be belonging to general category before appropriate forum. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)