01Facts
The petitioner, a Teacher (L.B.), challenged the District Level Certificate Verification Committee’s order/inquiry report dated 6 January 2026, which cancelled his caste certificate as forged and fabricated and recommended recovery of benefits and termination of his service.
¶ 1He contended that the Committee lacked authority to cancel the certificate and that the prescribed procedure had not been followed.
¶ 2The State submitted that the authorities would act in accordance with law.
¶ 302Issues
i.Whether the District Level Certificate Verification Committee had authority to cancel the petitioner’s caste certificate.
¶ 2, 4ii.Whether the cancellation and consequential recommendations could stand when made without notice or an opportunity of hearing.
¶ 403Law Applied
The petitioner relied on the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013, contending that the District Level Committee’s role was limited to referring the matter to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee and that it lacked power to cancel the certificate.
¶ 2The Court held that an authority cannot assume powers not conferred on it by statute, and that action carrying civil consequences must comply with the procedure prescribed by law and the principles of natural justice, including an adequate opportunity of hearing.
¶ 404Reasoning
The Committee cancelled the certificate and recommended recovery and termination without issuing notice or hearing the petitioner, despite the serious civil consequences of those actions.
¶ 4The Court also found that the Committee could not exercise the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee’s powers where the statute did not confer them.
¶ 4The impugned action therefore could not stand.
¶ 405Holding
The Court quashed the Committee’s order/inquiry report dated 6 January 2026.
¶ 5It reserved liberty for the respondents to refer the matter to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, if warranted; any further proceedings must comply with the applicable statutory provisions and afford the petitioner an adequate hearing.
¶ 5The petition was allowed, with no order as to costs.
¶ 6Original Court PDF
PANKAJ KUMAR SANGAMvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
