Sunil Kuma Sinha Juge ,J r d HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR (Sinqle Bench: Hon’ble Shri Sunil Kumar smnaLJ) W.P.(C) No. 6895 of 2009 Narottam Singh;Argal aged about 17 PETITIONERS years, S/o Late buram Jata, Bein minor through next frid uratram Argal age aout 33 years, S/‘o Late Shri Bburam Jatav R/o Village Jatga, Tahsil Podiuoda, Distt. rba Versus 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through Sectary is Secretary Tribal Welfa Deartment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur Sub Divisional Officer, (Revenue) Katghora, Distt. Korba 8.21 ) (1) (SO.) f c Sub-Divisional Officer .D. ‘or issuance of a permanent aste~ crtificate. The said application was registered as Rvenue Case No. e e 1141/B~121/2008—09 (villge—Jatga). Th S.D.O./respondent No.2 called a e a report on 15 points about status of the petitioner from e concerned th Tehsilar. Naib Tehsildar, asan, conducted n enquir and submitted d P a y , . ' ’ his report dated 2.6.2009 with a finding that the caste of the petitioner is Petitioner- Narottam Singh Argal filed an appliation c before the Ba v g en S d b a pr Ko RESPONDENTS re t re p (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India) Appearance: Mr. Parag Ka, otech Advocate of the petitioner. Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocat for the State/respondents e . ORDER (i§00 0 Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. .P.(C) No. 689s (£270 w 09 ‘Jatav’ which is declared as Scheduled Caste , therefore, a permanent caste-éertiflcate may be issued to the petitioner. (2) The S.D.O., respondent No.2, perused the report and dismissed the application of the petitioner for issuance of‘ caste-certificate vide impugned order dated 16.7.2009 (Annexure-P/5) on the ground that in the year 1950, forefathers of the petitioner were residents of Bhind (M.P.) and the family of the petitioner is residing in .Bhaiyathan, in the State of Chhattisgarh smce 1985 only and no documents relating to the posrtlon of 1960 was filed therefore permanent caste certificate cannot be issued to the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the said order in this writ petition. 3) The case of the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner namely Baburam Jatav was appointed as Assistant Te’acher in Primary School Ghumadand, Education District North Pratappur, Surajpur in the- year 1982. Copy of his appointment letter has been filed as Annexure- P/6- Part—ll. After serving for a very long period, he died in harness and thereafter the brother of petitioner, i.e. another son of Late Baburam Jatav, namely Dinesh Kumar, Was given compassionate appointment as Siksha Karmi Grade-Ill vide order dated 2.3.2007 (Annexure—P/S- Pa(,rt—l) and Dinesh Kumar is working on the said post. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled for issuance of a permanentcaste-certificate on these " grounds which was never considered by the S.D.O., and even after recommendation of Naib Tehsildar, Pasan after due enquiry, the S.D.O. refused to issue permanent caste-certificate to the petitioner. W.P.(C) N0. 6895 of2009 (4) Mr. Parag Kotecha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the father of the petitioner was a permanent Government servant in erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in the area which ultimately fell in the jurisdiction of Successor State of Chhattisgarh, his sons & daughters would be treated as bonafide residents of State of Chhattisgarh and on the same analogy they would be issued caste-certificate provided their caste is included in the Presidential Order. Mr. Kotecha referred to the two decisions of this Court,one passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 5314/07 Ku. Bharti Banpuriya —Vs- State of C.G. and others (DB) and the other in Siddharth Choure —Vs- State of C.G. & Othqers, 2008 (3) C.G.LJ. 337. .(5) The General Administration Department of State of C.G. vide notification No. F9—1/2001/1/3 dated 27.6.2007 has given the criteria for bonafide residents of the State and according . to which the officers/employees, their spouses and sibling have been included within the criteria of bonaflde residents of the State and the petitioner also falls within the above category. The petitioner belongs to ‘Jatav’ caste for which a temporary caste-certificate has been issued in favour of the petitioner (Annexure-P/3). The residence certificate has also been issued in favour of the petitioner (Annexure-P/2). The said caste is also included as Scheduled Castes in the relevant list. ln two decisions, referred to above, this Court has held that once a person is recognized as resident of Chhattisgarh, then same analogy shall be applied for the purposes of his children also provided his caste is included in the Presidential Order. Since the petitioner is’ bonafide resident of Chhattigarh and Jatav caste i's included in Presidential Order as Scheduled Caste; therefore, he (6) / r W.P.(C) No. 6895 bf2009 @’ is entitled to be issued a permanent caste-certificate and in the above facts and circumstances of the case‘ the impunged qrder dated 16.7.2009 cannot be sustained. (7)' Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate has also not controverted the above legal position. (8) For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 16.7.2009 passed by respondent No.2/ Sub-Divisional Offtcer V (Revenue), Katghora is set-aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for issuance of caste-certmcate afresh in light of the observations made in this order and in accordance with law within a period of 7 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (9) With the above observations, the petition is finally disposed of. (1 0) No cost. Sd/— it I: lief Sunil Kumar Sinha ' Judge vatli (