High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Rajendra S/O. C Harris vs The Deputy Commissioner & … on 11 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Rajendra S/O. C Harris vs The Deputy Commissioner & … on 11 January, 2010
Author: Ajit J Gunjal

IN THE’. Hzcm caum’ or KARNATAKA AT

DATED THIS THE 1 3th my op’ JANLKRY: 2:619 %% ” « ~

BEFORE

THE HONBLE Mr.JUSfI’ICE MIT J.f%<;-:;;u;;L Q';

WRIT PETITION N9.E§?85: 03 géoégfxiw-CC)

BETWEEN:


Sri Rajencira, A _ _  H
S/0 C.I~Iarris,_    I 
Agec¥ a,bou£"438   '  
Senior Teicizcoin     V.

Assistant (C~cr1c%::’a}), €)’ITf3c’€: ~ ,
Of the vVS1:{b—»I;)isrisit3%;:;a1E2zjgir;c¢i§”‘ ‘
Telephone ExC}’1.;–n_1_ge, ‘F.afikere,
C2hi1qné.gaiur’Dis’trir:t§’ ~

(Sr: A.M.Vi;ay,;xd:e%.) A

2 : Tfie ” “€;’3ommissi0I1er,

_ Casts Verification
‘{}0:I:::;i;t€eg::;Chif1*adu1″ga District,
Chitradurga, 33720 E.

” ” v ‘me siissistant Commissianar,

~ _ xC:;1ii¥z*adL1rga Subwfiivisisng
‘7 Chitradurga»577 201.

T 3; The Tahsildar,

Chitradurga Taluk,
Elhitraéurga-57″? 201.

. I’ .PE’FI’I’I{3NER

4. The General Manager Telecorn.

BSNL. Chikmagalur TD.

Chikmagalur–577 101. ..

(Sri C.Jagadeesh, Sp]. GA for R1 toga; Sm.t’;G’;i;aksiii.mi, it it
Adv. for Sri Y.Hariprasad, Adv. for[R4)”‘ t_ ~:’ ‘ .

This writ petition is filed unde’i1.ArticlespV:2;26′ and; 2’27V”r.p
of the Constitution of India—._ praying. to, thevf
impugned order/ official rnemoraricluni “dated? 115072007
passed by the R3 vide Annexiireai and’.c_ons3equently
quash the order dated 19…A_12._i2OO8-. , passed by the R4 vide
Annexurewl. as null and ‘Void and ielstoife the petitioner
into service with all conse_qu’ential’~.vbenefits that he is
entitled. ” 7 ~

This \?Vft’l;’i; Signing’-.’oriV’for» preliminary hearing
in ‘B’ Group ‘ti_his__diay,”tl1e ‘C.jouri:–made the following:

‘l’heA”puet’itio’ne_r’ the order passed by the

third i’e’sponder1tV”revol%:in’g the certificate issued in his

favour mmi as a person belonging to Schedule

“‘..:c”orhmunity which is classified as Schedule Tribe. The

backdrop of the case is as follows:

petitioner claims that he belongs “Kammara”‘

f

%

5

2. Mrfifijay, Immed counsel appearing –fc};f the
patitianer vehemently submits that in the f’1:1f$_i4
no o§3p0rtz.1I3ity was gven to me pefifigfiégi’
decumsnts to Show that 7.

g1*a11dfather belonged to
further submitg that the
wouid clearly disci§:3$ éefiibfécing the
Christianity faith they community.

He further sz;:b::-giis tiiat (I;€’3rI:1:’:.’i}:,”r;’.””,'{E”+./{Z113 authority, to aither
issue f;.1″f weuld be the Tahsildar and

the fiés 4V:”1§)t’«1 §:iade any independent enqujxfir ts

V. revbféiei said” «cafiiticata, Incieed, he submits that no

also given before the Tahsildar ti) support

1ii3 £:}.aifi1}V;1e beisnged to “Kammara” Commmity,

A. 35;” ‘. Mr;Jagadish, ieamed Special Gmremment

‘giévacate appeméng far {.318 resmnéents submiis that it is

….;~gg doubt true that opportunity was not given ta tha

patitianer, I1€V€I””I1h€’,’:i€SS, :10 {1OC’€,}Ij{1€}f11ZS are produced

2 §

indeed, no opportuxfity was given to the petifionef before
the Tahsildar in support his coxxtention. It is
the Tahsildar has 1101: acted on the report
Commissioner ta hold that the pe:itiQn3f’Vd§;§§§;v
to Schedule Tribe. Endersd, it .

documenm are forthC0ming__}V§cfQré’ 03f’
ts shcsw that his fqrefatherg” §3e}Q§1g§§” f’§<Zamn1ara"
COII1IIlLi1°lif}r' or far from Dakshina
Kannada Di3§I7§.{§t,_g}r "fiormal resiciance

of th{%-, petifiifiiiéwrfu 1:0 be either Shimoga,

Bhadravaixflijor wherein 8.SS'£11}Zi.ifig that if the

é_ pefifiionfi Vvbe1éiigs,..__.¥;0' "Kammara" Community from that

'i:¥i 7a;ce, §:.–<ifin_ot be ciaasifled as a person belonging to

81616:' mike or scheéule caste. It is trite that the

jéetiéiaziéégr éiaims thaé: Em beimfigs ii} Scheduie 'E'ribe whet:

~»}jVis;L"«si¥:fiVing$ Ciaim that {hay mlang to Christianity and

' iigauvfi sacured emplayment in several Government Agencim

'4 Wiznéer 'aha GM Category. The Tahsiidar is also require& to

leak mm this aspect {sf {the matter 3.116 also ascafiain

a

…/t~/

indeed whether the petitiorzer does belong £0
Tribe when the siblings or other relatives of
do net Claim the tag of the Sch<edL?;J;c§"T'}:*i*;:1§:."-4'«' " »« V' ' V'

6. Be that as it may,
passed in violation of the of the
order passed by the :9 43¢ ‘aside. The
report ai’ the Assistasmt be taken note

of by the .3;h«:a…5c1ocun1eI}ts to be

pmducgad ‘
thé is gassed:

{1} ~35; AAa1s1é€:%;ed. The imyugaed erder at
2\.;§;.”11?;¢’xuA:;{é’i;”sTtéznds quashed.
V ‘V 4’:;.~:.::;3;fi:ter stanés remitted to the Tahsildar for

wasfgz éizsposai in acmrdance witii law.

x T {3}.T}1e Tahsildar shall take note 0f the repgrt af £3519

Assistant Commissiener.

{4}”I’he petitimler shah take this; pmceedings as
notice ta: him and shali appear before the

w

&./-”’,”-.’»w

Tahsiiciar on 15:12 Februaxjs and £3.16: his u

on the same ciay. The Tahsildar

the proceedings within :1’1V<);§i*1tij;sV"~

fmm 15¢' February 2019.

Ruie is issued and made zéjjééizlte.
Mzzdagadish, Iear1i¢§i- Exévocate

is parmitted ta fi1a.memoA.ef:.appéa1;a:iCe’ four weeks.

Eaéga