The Caste Certificate has the effect of certifying that the certificate holder belongs to a certain caste, either Other Backward Castes, or Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. This certificate holds immense importance in affirmative action in employment and educational opportunities.
In the instant article, we deal with the recent position of law espoused by the Allahabad High Court vis-à-vis Orders of the District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee.
Since, there was no legislation operating in this field, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Km. Madhuri Patil and another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others streamlined a thorough procedure for issuance of caste certificates/ social status certificates, their scrutiny, and their approval.
15 guidelines were provided under the aforesaid judgment. The said guidelines have been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court as law in of G.M. Indian Bank vs. R. Rani and another. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as follows:
“In view of the foregoing discussions it cannot be said that the directions given in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) were simply guidelines. In our view, the law laid down in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) has been reiterated · times without number not only by 2-Judge Benches but even by a 3-Judge Bench of this Court.”
It is settled law that the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee shall be final and conclusive only subject to the writ jurisdiction of the Hon’ble High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Regarding inquiry, the law has been settled as follows:
“Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims. The Inspector would go to the local place of residence and original place from which the candidate hails and usually resides or in case of migration to the town or city, the place from which he originally hailed from. The vigilance officer should personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He also should examine the school records, birth registration, if any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have knowledge of the social status of the candidate and then submit a report to the Directorate together with all particulars as envisaged in the proforma, in particular, of the Scheduled Tribes relating to their peculiar anthropological and ethnological traits, daiety, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies etc. by the concerned castes · or tribes or tribal communities etc”
If the Report of Vigilance Officer submits the claim of the candidate or applicant to be not genuine or doubtful, then a show cause notice shall be issued supplying a copy of the Vigilance Report. Hence, the matters brought forth by the Committee must be mandatorily inquired into by the Vigilance Cell. The inquiry by Vigilance Cell cannot be bypassed.
In the recent judgment of Chhavi Raj Gond vs. State of U.P. and 2 others, the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has upheld the position of law aforesaid and has quashed the cancellation order of the District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee without relegating the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal before the divisional level caste scrutiny committee. Since the matter was never referred to the Vigilance Cell for inquiry, it was a fundamental defect which was not curable. The relevant portion of the judgment is quoted below:
“7. Once the law declared by the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (Supra) holds the field and in the instant case we are satisfied that the matter was never referred to the Vigilance Cell, the order impugned cannot sustain.
8. Consequently, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated August 25, 2024, passed by the District Level Committee is hereby quashed.”
To read the entire judgment, kindly refer to Neutral Citation – 2025:AHC:9270-DB (Writ C No. 34247 of 2024)