01Facts
The petitioner 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 services.
¶ 1–3He contended that the Committee lacked authority to cancel the certificate and had not followed the procedure prescribed by law. The State submitted that the authorities would act in accordance with law
¶ 1–302Issues
i.1. Whether the District Level Certificate Verification Committee was competent to cancel the petitioner’s caste certificate
¶ 2, 4ii.2. Whether the Committee could cancel the certificate and make consequential recommendations without notice and an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner
¶ 403Law Applied
The Court referred to the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013, and the Rules framed under it, observing that caste-certificate verification and cancellation must be undertaken by the authority competent under the applicable statutory provisions.
¶ 2, 4–5It also applied the principles of natural justice: action having civil consequences must not be taken without following the prescribed procedure and providing an adequate opportunity of hearing
¶ 2, 4–504Reasoning
The District Level Committee cancelled the petitioner’s certificate and recommended recovery of benefits and termination without issuing notice or affording him a hearing. The Court held that these actions had civil consequences and could not be taken without procedural fairness.
¶ 4It further found that the Committee could not assume powers conferred on the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee where the statute did not grant it that authority
¶ 405Holding
The Court quashed the Committee’s order/inquiry report dated 6 January 2026.
¶ 5–6It left the respondent authorities at liberty to refer the matter to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee, if warranted, subject to compliance with the applicable statutory provisions and affording the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing. The petition was allowed, with no order as to costs
¶ 5–6Original Court PDF
PRABHAT KUMAR SANGAMvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
