_ (By : A~ K suVi3BA1;_m as A S PONNANNA, ADV )
'V.'..vAN:D":.,
THE DEPUTY COMMISSKJNER
V 3 THE ASSISTANT {3OMM£SSI€)NER
IN rm: men comm' or KARNATAKA, FA »
DATED Trim THE mm
BEFGRE «A % V : % ,
TI-IE I-IOI€'B3}E am. JUs'rzc. ~:~{ mans?
wan' PETITION' 414241: '(LB--ELE)
BETWEEN '
KQSURESH'
S/0.KGBU:§.D;wPA
AGE ; SBVYEAREE Ia,
NO. 225,; KOQDE€3--E _3FII,LAGE
SOMWARPET 'I'ALUI'<Z._ ' » _ _
KODAGU
PETITIONER
1 ' ._'I'HE. STAJI"E 0;? KARNATAKA
"B? '!'}'S 'SECRETARY
REVENUE EEPARTMENT
~ : ,rvI.s; BUILDING, BANGALORE-1.
KGDAGU I3ISI'RIC'I'
MAIDIKERE.
MADEKERI DIVISION
MADIKERI. 'i E
5
E"
\/
4 THE TA}-ISILDAR
SOMWARPET TALUK .-- " --
SOMWARPET KODAGU DIS'I'R}i'(L'I'."'u '_
5 s N RAJARAO, S/O NANJ RAO3
AGE:35 YEARS '
HEGGADAHALLI, SOMWARPET TALUK ' '
KODAGU DISTRICT. _
RESP€)I-i9EN'i'S
(By 817% ; R DEVDAS, AGA 'F'Q'F2 F:.1,"«r4= ).
(BY M / s. RAVIVARMA KUMAR..A/_S,VVAD'v F'€)'ji2 R5)
THIS WRET P§3T'I'i'lON 'FILED 'LIFJDER ARTICLES 225
AND 227 OE«THEI-C«QN'$ITUTIC3'N«fOF' INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE APPROPRIATE 'a&*RI*T.'jVvOR---AORQER OR DIRECTION IN
THE NATURE._ "0§3';;.._V.Q1JO.__ 'WARRANTO OUSTING THE
RESPONDENT ..z~;O.5 *;I?Rc)M,THE OFFICE OF' THE MEMBER
OF KODAGU 'DlS'i'R'E-C'? z'I1.LA..pANcHAYAT AND PLACE THE
PETITIOMTIR«HEREIN'~.IN=.Ti!.E--* SAID OFFICE TO SECURE
THE ENDS '<1-)F;.¥US?ICE.»-- I
_THI'S PETITI_OI§I, CEOMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
' OAYV-TrmA--cO:UART MAEETHE FOLLOWING :
ORDER
though listed for hearing on
‘MiSC.W:1’§[.19/2009 to vacate the interim Order, with
Of the learned counsel for the parties, is
heard and disposed of by this order.
certificate issued to the fifth
neither been cancelled nor withdrawn. Hefgee, it
submits that the fifth respondent b «
the benefit of the caste certifi:£:iate:ié1Lre£adyi ‘isgiuegi ‘V
in his favour.
On the eontraxy,
counsel appearing for the V_p_eI:1;iti_oI.1_»er tiitat
the Tahsildar has; ;._§;.1i’lrer tliemespoedents
passed a detailed bidet to the
conclusion the”ieéi’st-e to the
fifth . Tiierefore, even
thoughi es ii canceling the
earlier iséueel the same would
hate 1:; Fview of the findings
Ieceizieii relies on Amatzxtma-C,
Qxtjler passed. _bj«* tire same: Tahsildar, wherein
_iAeffe’ctifie”~’ .Q;fc}_.e1′ Gf Withdrawing the caste
A ‘ , 3 ice17i:£fiea{e.._has been passed.
‘iiiiiifheitefem, in order to appreciate the
“-44coz1.:;e:i::;3ns of both sides, it woulé be just and
néceésary if the Tahsildar were to explain as to in
ii ivzhat circumstances the present older dated
23.06.2006 has been passed and also with regaxfi
to the fiomwithdrawal or otherwise of the caste
it
not belong toiib/Eo;1_’et?;1 oasis as certified by the Tahsiidar.
was forwarded to the deponent with a
.Vwhief;: was held and a report dated
sAr1nexure—-B was forwarded. In addition, it
that the Asst. Commissioner also flied a
T dated 13.10.2006 and the Deputy
Commissioner having come to the conclusion that there
certificate of the fifth respondent. To subiiiit *
reply by 9.3.2009. i’ i ii
Office to fuurnish a copy of’ if
pm today-” 3 V L A
6. In compliance with order,-V-thief: State
Govt. by memo dated dated
7.3.2009 of B S tlmyamagsomawarpet
taiuk, Kodagu inaér “setting that the
petitioner “dated 10.2.2006 to the
{Deputy fyrerify the caste to which the
5&1 respondent the 531 respondent does
a detailed report, puzsuant to
V:
was confusion in the matter of social status 0-51:?’
respondent, referred the matter to the ‘ ‘ d
Welfare ofiicer, Madikeri, to hokfi -fa
submit a report, who in turn .4_d.subdm,ttted an’ egg:
he was unabie to decide overdtfxevcaste Vie 531
respondent belongs the Deputy
Commissioner, in j:’v§t’?£’5rder dated
3.2.2000 AAddl. Director
General, ____ Enforcement Cell,
Bangale;’e,__ 0 S 10.4.2007 for further
be pending.
K .,.S.13.bbaiah, learned counsel for the
reiterates the averments made in the writ
vto’.V~”,jeontend that as the 51″ respondent did not
‘xb’elon’eg«;.Mvarata, a caste declared as Scheduled Tribe
” Constitution is disquaiifxed te be a member of
d’ Kodagu Zilla Panchayat. In reply, Sri Ravivarma
. u:f’Kuma:’, lmmed Senior Counsel for 5*’-5 respondent
Vehementiy contends that the question of issue” ,4
of quo warranto would arise only after
issued by the Tahsildar u13.de’r”-.the
Scheduled Castes and Schedu}e é__
Backward Classes (Reservaetie~z;1V:VV”0f
Act, 1990 (for short’:’u;1t1_e 1992, is
cancelled and even has an
alternate anti” V. an appea}
under 3 to the Asst.
a conflplaint to the
Deputy C9Vm.mis*e=,i_d;i-.i.er.’ ‘ ” -._ ” ‘ « ‘”
. the Learned Counsel, perused
is considerable force in the
; eubzjeiesieneeef the learned Senior Counsel that the
eaete_ ceftifieate Annexure R2 to the statement of
%ee«eeeb3eem’ens, issued under Ruie 3–A (2) and (3) of the
VT is Valid until it is cancelled as provided in Rule
30. If the petitiener is aggrieved by the certfiieate
_ respcfgdvefit under the Rules, and was
ta ‘(question the same by filing an appeal
_ to: that Revgeiise Subdivision.
fcommissioner, without adveltmg to the provisions of
Annexure-R2, the known method of canceiia%it3V1rif”L:«p.;:)’Ef_’
certificate is by filing an appeal under 4. ”
Act, within 30 days from the c:1a’t’e-of the K ‘V
order to the Asst. Commissicner
division.
9. In the instant thettpetitiener
lodged a written the Deputy
COII1IIIiSSiOI1_.(:3′;–i. Sm respondent
did not tleclared Scheduled
Tribe, aggrieved by the certificate
dated 13%;-10.2063 R2 issued to the em
utidert’ the Act to the Asst. Commissioner
10. What is inuiguixig is, the Deputy
law, exercised at §urisdict.ion not vested in him, to
the Tahsildar and the Asst. Commissioner ”
into the petitioners complaintv.a1’1d..s1£i)mit ‘::’e’poi1″f.t.
The approach of the Deputy in”
considered opinion, is
Had the Deputy COIflri;{l§..SSiQiIél”.’§3§1′}1}fi.€d it fiiiild to
Sec.4B of the Act, perhaps; would not
have been necessary.
13_t.’Ber esiiisat it.imgy, thefigh the petitioner did
not f11ez7.a’r.i– Sec.4B of the Act,
neverthelessflodged dwritten complaint to the Deputy
.Co111″mission’er, xfiffieh was referred to the Asst.
the Tahsildar, for their reports,
instead of the petitioner to fiie an appeal
ii €530.43 of the Act. in the circumstances, it
to me that ends of justice wouid be met if the
Commissioner is directed to forthwith forward
it the petitioners complaint to the Asst. Comxnissiogier
I
E 5,-
, E
1-Ads’ _