Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/9085/2009 1/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9085 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=============================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=============================================================
DESINGBHAI
KANTABHAI BARIA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KB PUJARA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 18/02/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1.0 By
way of the present petition, the petitioner
has inter alia prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned
order dated 30th July 2009 passed by the respondent
No.1 (received by the petitioner
on 19th August 2009) as per Annexure-E colly.
2.0 The
facts of the case, if put in a nutshell, are as under :
2.1 On
01st June 1965, the petitioner
was born and his father belonged to Scheduled Tribe community of
Hindu Baria Bhil. When the petitioner
was admitted in the Primary School for the first time 35 years ago,
his caste was stated to be Hindu Baria and sub-caste was indicated as
Hindu Baria Bhil at Sr. No.203 of the General Register of Vadbhet
Primary School, Taluka Devgadh Baria, District Dahod.
2.2 The
School Leaving Certificate of the petitioner
also contains the said date of birth. The District Social Welfare
Officer, Panchmahal, Godhra, issued caste certificate dated 09th
July 1983 bearing No.1890 as per Annexure-A stating that the
petitioner
belongs to Hindu Bhil Tribe, which is one of the Tribes recognized by
the Government of Gujarat as Scheduled Tribes.
2.3 On
22nd May 2009, the respondent No.1 issued a notice to the
petitioner
asking him to remain present before the Scrutiny Committee on 08th
June 2009 for verification of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate with
him. On 12th June 2009, the petitioner
forwarded his representation by an R.P.A.D. along with 15 documents
in support of his claim of belonging to Scheduled Tribe. However,
vide impugned order the respondent No.1 cancelled the caste
certificate dated 09th July 1983 issued to the petitioner
relying upon several documents. Hence, this petition.
3.0 During
the course of hearing, Mr.K.B. Pujara, learned
advocate for the petitioner,
has mainly submitted that while passing the impugned order, the
respondent No.1 has relied upon several documents, however, the
petitioner
has not been provided with any of the documents relied upon by the
respondent No.1 while cancelling the caste certificate of the
petitioner
and even the petitioner was not present on the date of
decision.
4.0 At
this stage, Mr.J.K. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader, has
submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case,
the respondent-authority will provide copies of the documents relied
upon by the respondent No.1 while passing the impugned order.
5.0 In
view of aforesaid, the present petition is hereby partly allowed. The
impugned order dated 30th July 2009 passed by the
respondent No.1 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is
remanded to the respondent No.1 for deciding the same afresh. The
respondent No.1 is directed to provide all the documents relied upon
by the respondent No.1 in the impugned order within a period of four
weeks from today. The petitioner
thereafter will file his reply and after hearing the petitioner,
it will be open for the respondent No.1 to pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law on the merits of the
matter. Subject to the aforesaid, Rule is made absolute.
6.0 It
will, however, be open for the petitioner
to make an application to appear through a lawyer before the
respondent No.1 and the same shall be considered in accordance with
law.
(K.S.
Jhaveri, J)
Aakar
Top