01Facts
The petitioner challenged a District Caste Verification Committee order directing the Tahsildar to cancel her caste certificate on the ground that she belonged to the Muslim religion.
pp. 3–5The proceedings followed a complaint by respondent No. 6 to the Superintendent of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Directorate, Mysore.
pp. 3–5The certificate had been obtained for contesting an election.
pp. 3–5The petitioner challenged the order, including on the grounds that she had not been given sufficient opportunity and that the complaint had been initiated through an impermissible procedure
pp. 3–502Issues
i.1. Whether the District Caste Verification Committee had jurisdiction to initiate verification proceedings on a complaint made by respondent No. 6 to the Superintendent of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Directorate
pp. 4–6ii.2. Whether the Committee’s order directing cancellation of the petitioner’s caste certificate could be sustained where the certificate was obtained for contesting an election and no qualifying request for verification had been made
pp. 5–603Law Applied
The Court applied Sections 4A, 4B, 4C, 4E and 4F of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990.
pp. 4–5A caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar may be challenged by an aggrieved person under Section 4B before the Assistant Commissioner, or by revision under Section 4F before the Deputy Commissioner.
pp. 4–5The District Caste Verification Committee may act under Section 4C only upon a request for verification from an appointing authority or an authority making admission to a course of study; a complaint to the Superintendent of Police is not a prescribed route for challenging a certificate
pp. 4–5Provisions in the judgment · 5
Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.,) Act, 1990 Section 4ASection 4BSection 4CSection 4ESection 4F
04Reasoning
The Court found that respondent No. 6’s complaint was, in substance, a challenge to the issuance of the petitioner’s caste certificate.
pp. 3–6Because the certificate was obtained for election purposes, and not for employment or admission to an educational institution, the Committee had received no qualifying request for verification under Section 4C.
pp. 3–6The complaint to the Superintendent of Police therefore could not confer jurisdiction on the Committee, making the resulting proceedings and order wholly without jurisdiction.
pp. 3–6The Court resolved the matter on that ground and did not decide the petitioner’s separate contention concerning adequacy of opportunity
pp. 3–605Holding
The Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the Committee’s order dated 20 January 2024.
pp. 6–7It reserved liberty to respondent No. 6 to initiate proceedings in accordance with law, including through the remedies identified under Sections 4B or 4F, if so advised.
pp. 6–7The application to vacate the stay was disposed of
pp. 6–7Original Court PDF
SMT REKHAvsTHE STATE OF KARANATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
