IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.20861 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : MARCH 22, 2011 GULZAR CHAND ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, REVENUE, PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. SS Salar, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. GS Attariwala, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. Rohiteshwar Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.4. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 It seems that the petitioner showed himself to be belonging to Scheduled Castes category and, therefore, was given land in restricted auction held on 27.10.1976. A complaint was made against the petitioner by one Chhinda Masih to the effect that the Scheduled Castes' Certificate, on the strength of which, the petitioner was allotted land, was issued on account of misrepresented facts, was forged and fabricated and, therefore, the petitioner did not belong to that category and was not Civil Writ Petition No.20861 of 2008 2 entitled to even join the auction proceedings. 2 Vide order 1.1.2002 (Annexure P-26), Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gurdaspur, conveyed to the petitioner that the Scheduled Castes' Certificate issued in favour of the petitioner is cancelled, on the basis of an inquiry conducted by Tehsildar, Gurdaspur. Admittedly, the petitioner was not joined in the inquiry. Even the language of order (Annexure P-26) indicates that the petitioner was not joined in the inquiry proceedings. 3 Be that as it may, as a consequence of passing of order (Annexure P-26), Chief Sales Commissioner, Gurdaspur cancelled the transfer of land in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 23.12.2004 (Annexure P-3). The petitioner went up in appeal. Vide order dated 14.3.2006 (Annexure P-2), the appeal has been dismissed by the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar. The revision of the petitioner has also been dismissed vide order dated 20.5.2008 (Annexure P-1) by the Financial Commissioner. By way of this petition, the petitioner challenges orders (Annexures P-26, P-3, P-2 and P-1), to which reference has been made above. 4 Surely, if civil consequences were to follow, the petitioner was required to be given notice before cancelling the Scheduled Castes' Certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. 5 Learned counsel for the respondents have justified the action on the strength of argument that the petitioner has even been convicted in a criminal case, having been found to have committed the offence of cheating by way of obtaining Scheduled Castes' Certificate on the basis of misrepresentation. Civil Writ Petition No.20861 of 2008 3 6 Be that as it may, I am of the considered opinion that before passing of order (Annexure P-26), the petitioner should have been joined in the inquiry proceedings and the principles of natural justice should have been observed. The petitioner is required to be given an opportunity of being heard and presenting his case. Inquiry proceedings conducted at the back of the petitioner cannot, possibly, be allowed to affect the rights of the petitioner. The petitioner came to know of cancellation of certificate/proposed cancellation of certificate only by way of order (Annexure P-26). 7 Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gurdaspur shall conduct an inquiry as to the veracity/genuineness of Scheduled Castes' Certificate issued in favour of the petitioner afresh, after joining the petitioner to see whether the certificate was issued on misrepresentation or on the strength of forged and fabricated documents and, thereafter, pass orders afresh. In the meanwhile, orders (Annexures P-3, P-2 and P-1) would be held in abeyance. 8 In case, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gurdaspur, concludes that Scheduled Castes' Certificate bearing No.3017, issued on 10.12.1975 by his office in favour of the petitioner, was on misrepresentation of the petitioner or in view of some forged document, orders (Annexures P-3, P-2 and P-1) shall stand revived. The inquiry be concluded within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 9 The parties would appear before the Sub Divisional Civil Writ Petition No.20861 of 2008 4 Magistrate, Gurdaspur, on 7.4.2011. 10 With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of. March 22, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?