The State Of Karnataka vs Kalavathy W/O Shivalingaiah … on 14 September, 2010

 The E34iog:1;'{A.E.(iT1cati0n Officer

   "i.'aT1si1<:1'ar
"   E ' 'Gujfibarga. ...PE3'1'I'1'lONERS

  SRI.M.KUMAR, AGA)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNK-\'IC'AKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEP1'EMi3E;R_;4: 
PRESENT CC CC2.
THE HONBLE     
AND   _  . . _  V
THE HONBLE MR.JUST1CI§S;fii%£jIA$'PIC.  M
WRIT   
BETWEEN:    C  C C
1. The State of     

Represented by _i_'tsVE3'e€:reta§jI3I§""   V. 
Education Depa1't.1'£€1«ent,_» ' A A'

M.s.Bu:3d1'fig,AEe.V;::, 3 - ---
Bangalore -560 '{JG»1:g1'po'1'2it.ion, Giiibziigei.
After such appointment: on 16.12.89, the respondeiits were

directed to produce the caste (:ei'tii"ieate i.'SE,-'$_tI®'(i'._V by

appropriate authority within 15 days.  t-l___1"e_

res onderits a '£'O3.ChCd Tah*si1dar,"'Gti11:)21rs-far for tissue" of'?

caste certificate. However;V._'i' Taiisiiclg-i1"': issued an
endorsement to the eff'ee.t that  po'ssi'oie to give
verifiezltion certificate \re'1~i;i\y,i.1ig_ .r'espoiide11t:s beiong
to Beds Jangama__caste '_}'.].1s:\./fi'€,\'\," V.oAi';_th'e'v(ff-oVige;V"nment circular,
The endorsem'eiit_:p1' igsfiilefia.t(fiiv,_._2:9.12.1989. It is
thereafter, §.t'h'e._ iT..'.e'f::po1fir1_éI1ts~.." iiiied. writ petitions in
W.1>.Nos.12955212956/9o'eti «.?_'e'hai§1enging the said
endo1'seiz'ieVrito' The said writ petition
Came betallowedto1{i't'--sV"'s:ibmissio1i made by both the
parties t.1ia..t,' tl1e"iss1i'e  in the writ petition is the

same gags one iii-voived in the ease of Kii1k.ar'ni Geeta M. Vs

  of Ka1;1'i«af.ia.1:a and others reported in HR E996

   In pursuance to the said order, the

resp;onid.e'ri.t,.s V"e~;i,ppeai'ed before the said sei*u.t_i.ni2:ir1g

C0fi13fi1itt€C~ _fQ,i"'21pp1'Op1'iE1i',(3 (:ert:1'fi(:at.e. In the mean while

 



'l"cate§o1y;»_---they a.rc"c'utitled to claim such benefits as are

"'_adi1l1issib_le.a.s"=pei' rules, liberty  rescwed for taking

the comp'et.eri't aa,1thorit:y, with due notjicc of the proposed

a'et.ion. £xgjg1'ic2ved by the said order, the State is before this

ll .Ce_1,'11"-t.-.A '

of the View that: their case is covered by the Jt.1ClgI11CI'ili of
this Court in the case of Kulkami Gecta M. Vs St'atc of
Karhataka and others and they also relied  the
J udgnieiiitz of the Tribuilal in appl_icat,ior1 N 
held that, until the decision with  V  
certificate produced by them is 
to be considered as beloiiging  
are entitled to service  to
general merit ca11didVate:.'~  the t31l(ZlO1'S€I11CI}t
issued by the  and direction was
issued to  and other service

behefits't'a{fail.al£1le 'lgehelr'al m_erits candidate within three
mo11ths7._fro--m thee'oArrimti.h.i'c--atioI1 of the order and it would

be subject to the  caste and income verification.
Furth-erheld th.at',"i'f the applicants belonging to a reserved

furthei'  afte1' the report: of the verification of caste by

AL/.



.v,a1'1d .»13*§vaI' eonteI1tio1_1s», it is not in dispute that, the

V"._v1*espondeh'ts'w_{Ve1'e appointed as persons be1o11gir1;_g to

 _  ju'ri.s;di:_etiona1 '1' ahsildar de(:}ari1h1g that they belong to
   Caste. It is in that context the pet:itio11ers called
 _.._j'd'i,1por; the respondents to produce the c:ert.ifiCate from

u;"l'af1si1da1'. Admittedly the Tahsildar did not issue any

x

4. Per eont1';1, the lee.11'11c*d. (*o1..1'11sel for the
1'esponclent:s submitted that the respontlents were
appointed on the basis of' the (:ert.i1'ic.21t.e iss1.1e(1V-"by the
Assistant Commissioner (Revenue)  of
Gulbarga. When he a.pp1'oached the  
to grarlt a. certificate. In View of 

Caste Verification Committee. Till Co11"1m.i'ttteeuo

decision, the 1'es.po1'1dent.s»sire 'emitled benefits gra1'1ted
by the r1'1.ibuI:},éL1 _1'«_ts=it:1pu.gned:fjorder. Therefore no case

for i11te1'fe;fe1h1'CeV"1s;'ihjadef'  V'

5. From) Vt11e'A.eifr)Tifes21id facts emtl circumstances

schedule eeistef' They were not issued with 21 cert1'fieat'e by

c(21't4i_i'ic:21t.e, on the e(:>1'1t1'a1*y. he c1e('?ii1'1e(_'i to issuczr cte1'ti.1'i<t2:1te



as

iniiuenceci by any circiiizirs issued, c.1i1'cciions issuccl
earlier directing the respondents to £}.p})1'(,)E1(?h Caste

Verification Commiiiiee on the ground. t.1"1:;1t, the li}y1£'tifl.'C,i' 

before Verification Committee. Till the 'i'.211'1s§€_](.i'2i1:/_'Vii--ssueyes_

such Caste certificate and the c:or1°eci»11ess.of't}1:e'v c7c'rt.ific;;1_te' 'V

is tested in accordance with law, "ighef'i'*ospo:iden'tse'i=€: "1'?:jo't

entitled to any benefits 1'1ot\viii'1sxta11dAii1g_;;  

manage to continue in empI.oyAi'1.1en1. fo1*"'n1,ore;§tha11 20

years. certainly they are not*efi;*fi}i1eti{fi.{)'Abenefits to which

  the order passed by
the '1'ribi1ns.i  It requires to be set

aside _ u'1"huefe.foI'erwe4V  following

ORDER

‘A V. petition is allowed.

[ii},V__03~ The impugned order at Anncxure–A, dated
06.07.2009 in Application Nos.-451/2003 81

5386/ 2008 passed by the Kamataka

Admii1isi:rz11.ive ‘E’ribui’1a1 qiiashed.

(iii)

1,9

The Talisiidar, Guibai*ga is c:1i_1’0(tt.ed to hold an
enquiry regarding the staii.1s oi” the i*csp01’ic1ent.s

herein, give them sui’i’i(:ir;:i1t, 0ppc)i*t.:m;ity.._ to

substantiate their case, t.hei~e-2§i_i”te1~*;.’fr.

enquiiy, investigation, I)V£’:iSvS” :1ppm’pi*i,at.e 0;1’c1e:’s’.

in accordance with iawia-npd on’ ‘mpe’i”its.V}
Any such ,orc1er passed is ‘subject to

appeal and District Caste
Verifi::at.’i*on after the

i”espon.defit.s4.”‘*s::.icc–e.edin this exercise they

tovhother benefits to which

” V’ they are .enti’t}__e’d to.

‘ “Flee respondents shall give a writteil application

1 F.§t1i§f:i.s’11ii1g aii particuiars to the Talisiidai’ on or

héfoi-e 01.10.2010.

On receipt. of such

application and after due intimation to the

i’esp011dents he shall complete the ciiqiiiry on

1x/’

yiuix.

01′ bef(.):’e 31.12.2010 Elild pass a:1}.)p:’opa’iat.c2

mders.

Ordered accozrdingly.

SBN