$EwgiE 5)) F" H Cg) @ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHA‘ITISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) (Lgm/q/ WRIT PETITION (S) NO. ég’ OF 2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS vao. / Dwarika Prasad Sonwani, Caste Nagarchi, S/o Sahdev Ram Sonwani, aged about 23 years, R/o Village Charota, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) Social Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner, Schedule Tribe and Schedule Caste Development, Chhattisgarh, Raipur. Di recto r, Schedule Tribe Research and Training Centre, Ravishankar University Campus, Raipur (C.G.) \ VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Department of Panchayat and @ /' 5. The Additional Tahsilar, Up-Tahsil Bhakhara, District Dhamtarl (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Koylibeda, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) I ag WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF i INDIA g ® V HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 691 of2011 Dwarika Prasad Sonwani. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. ;“”WAN N,W MWW ,. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotli,_J. Present: Shri P.P.Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1 to 5. ORDER (ORALt (Passed on 29 day of March, 201 1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made an application for grant of temporary caste certificate on 01.08.2009 to the respondent No. 5 ii.e. the Additional Tahsildar, Up-Tahsil, Bhakhara, District Dhamtari. It is filrther submitted that instead of granting temporary caste certificate on the basis of records and reports produced by the Patwari, the respondent No. 5 is seeking clarification from the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short ‘the Committee ’), W which is not required under any provisions’of law, before grant of a caste certificate. Shri Sahu relies on a letter dated 09.03.2011 (Annexure P/9) wherein he has been informed that the matter has been sent to the Committee for instructions and guidelines. 2. Despite opportunity granted to the State/respondent No. l to 5, on 22.03.2011, neither any instructions have been sought nor any response has been filed. Shri Singh submits that he is not in a/ position to say anything on the basis of submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. On perusal of the records, it appears that the respondent No. 5, instead of considering the application of the petitioner in accordance with law, is seeking guidelines/directions of the Committee, which is not the requirement, as the Committee is constituted not to issue guidelines to other competent officer but to verify caste/social status certificate issued by the competent authorities. Thus, on the ground that guidelines are being sought for by the Committee, the delay caused in issuance of the caste certificate to the petitioner, is not reasonable. 4. Accordingly, the respondent No.5 is directed to examine the application of the petitioner for grant of temporary caste certificate, in accordance with law and pass appropriate order, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from today. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is - disposed of. Sd/-' Satish K. Ag‘“ ‘hotri Judge K , Amit