Burden To Prove Caste Lies On Claimant; False Caste Certificates Can Lead To Withdrawal Of Benefits: AP High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the burden of proving a caste claim lies on the claimant under the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993.

A Division Bench of Justice D. Ramesh and Justice Alapati Giridhar further observed that benefits secured through false community certificates can be withdrawn under the Act.

It thus set aside a Single Judge's order that had quashed the cancellation of Scheduled Caste certificates issued to two brothers and set aside their dismissal from service by the State Bank of India.

The Court held that where an inquiry into an alleged false caste certificate is vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice, the matter should ordinarily be remanded to the competent authority for fresh consideration from the stage at which the violation occurred.

It noted that the authorities had found that the brothers belonged to the Balija community, which is not recognised as a Scheduled Caste in Andhra Pradesh. However, the Bench directed the District Level Scrutiny Committee to reconsider the matter after furnishing the relevant documents, including the inquiry report, to the brothers and allowing them an opportunity to submit supporting material.

The Bench observed:

“Generally, the Claimant needs to submit a detailed family tree mentioning the name of their great-grandfather and great-grandmother, their siblings, their names, marriage, residences and also their education and employment particulars, along with their caste certificates to the extent available.

Even if the Claimant fails to file all these particulars, the concerned Authorities have a duty to draw a family tree with all these particulars as stated supra, including all their caste certificates, marriage photos/videos, social media etc., with electronic evidence to arrive at a just conclusion in an enquiry.

It is needless to mention that on finding a case of a false community certificate, the Authorities shall also examine to verify the caste certificates of the family members, Ascendant and Descendant order, to proceed as per law.

It is needless to mention that, as per Section 11 of the Act, the benefits secured on the basis of a false community certificate are to be withdrawn, either in education or employment or both. The Act also contemplates their recovery, and criminal prosecutions apart from provisions of IPC/BNS of the concerned including the abettors, depending on the facts of each case"

The dispute arose after SBI received an anonymous complaint alleging that the brothers had secured employment by producing false caste certificates. The Bank asked the authorities to verify their caste status. Following an inquiry, the authorities concluded that they did not belong to the Scheduled Caste community.

The inquiry report relied, among other things, on the fact that one brother's caste was recorded as “Balija” in a ration card and that their family was predominantly known as belonging to the Balija community.

The brothers, however, contended that the authorities had failed to consider their educational records and other relevant documents.

The authorities subsequently cancelled their caste certificates. SBI then dismissed them from service.

Aggrieved by these decisions, the brothers approached the High Court, challenging both the cancellation of their caste certificates and their dismissal from service.

The Single Judge allowed their writ petitions, holding that the inquiry had violated the principles of natural justice. The Court noted that the authorities had not furnished copies of the anonymous complaint or the inquiry report to the brothers. It accordingly set aside the caste certificate cancellation orders and the consequential dismissal orders. It also directed the reinstatement of one brother and payment of terminal benefits to the other, without back wages.

Challenging this decision before the Division Bench, SBI argued that the Single Judge should have remanded the matter for a fresh inquiry instead of setting aside the cancellation of the caste certificates and directing reinstatement and payment of terminal benefits. The Bank also submitted that the brothers had been issued show-cause notices and had participated in the inquiry.

In response, counsel for the brothers argued that the authorities had relied on the caste entry in the ration card and the findings of a local inquiry without properly considering their educational records. They further submitted that the inquiry report and anonymous complaint had not been furnished to them, violating the principles of natural justice.

After considering the rival submissions, the High Court held that the matter ought to have been remanded to the competent authority to resume the inquiry from the stage at which the violation of natural justice had occurred, rather than setting aside the orders and granting consequential relief.

The Court also emphasised that the burden of proving caste status lies on the claimant under Section 6 of the 1993 Act.

In this regard, the Court said that claimants should ordinarily provide detailed family particulars, including a family tree, educational and employment records, marriage details and available caste certificates of family members. These particulars would assist the authorities in verifying their claims.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed SBI's appeals and remanded the matter to the District Level Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration. It directed the Committee to furnish the brothers with all relevant documents, including the inquiry report, and give them an opportunity to submit supporting material. The Committee was directed to conclude the proceedings within three months of receiving the order.

The Bench clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the claims or the validity of the caste certificates, directing the authorities to decide the matter independently, uninfluenced by the Court's observations.

Counsel for SBI: G. Sudheer Kumar.

Counsel for the Respondents: K. V. Raghu Veer; Government Pleaders for Services I and II.