Existing User Account
Subscribe Premium

Caste Certificate Issued By Taluka Development Officer Is Valid, Not Violative Of Gujarat SC/ST Act 2018: High Court Dismisses PIL

PRIYANKA PREET

11 March 2022 12:30 PM GMT

    • Caste Certificate Issued By Taluka Development Officer Is Valid, Not Violative Of Gujarat SC/ST Act 2018: High Court Dismisses PIL

    The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a PIL challenging a government order which permitted Taluka Development Officer, who is an officer under the Panchayat Department, to issue caste certificates under the Gujarat Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Regulations of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Act, 2018.The petitioner-Trust had challenged...

    The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a PIL challenging a government order which permitted Taluka Development Officer, who is an officer under the Panchayat Department, to issue caste certificates under the Gujarat Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Regulations of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Act, 2018.

    The petitioner-Trust had challenged the GO stating that caste certificate can be issued only by the Revenue Authorities not below the rank of Mamlatdar. It was argued that by way of the impugned order of the State authorities, there was a dilution of the stringent provisions of law in issuing caste certificates.

    Dismissing the challenge, a Bench comprising of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J Shastri remarked,

    "This communication which is being issued by the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar is noway can be said to be illegal in any form as it is issued for the purpose of carrying out the object of the Parent Act and for effective and proper implementation of the provisions of the Act."
    The Court noted that the object of the Act is to provided a mechanism for issuance/ cancellation of caste certificates. Further, to verify and put check on the issuance of false certificates by applying corrective measure.
    In this regard, the Court said,
    "(impugned order)has been enacted by the State of Gujarat for Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificate to the persons belonging to the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes or Other Backward Classes. So there appears to be no conflict of any nature nor is effected of diluting the main object for the Parent Act set up."
    The Court further noted that over a period of time, the State machinery has realized that in implementing the object and the provisions of verification method by the Scrutiny Committee, there arose some difficulties and as such, with a view to remove such difficulties, the order appears to have been issued in the name of Governor of Gujarat.
    "The impugned order is issued in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the Act whereby the authorities to whom the applications for issuance of caste certificate or the validity certificate were to be made, prior to commencement of the said Act, i.e. 25.02.2019, shall continue to function for the purpose of elections to Local Self Government Institutions (PRIs/ULBs) and admission to any educational institutions after 10th Standard till further orders. This appears to have been issued with a view to remove the difficulties which arose in implementing the provisions of the Act and the process to be carried out for verification of the caste certificate and as such, with a view to carry further object of the Parent Act, as empowered by virtue of Section 19 of the Act, the State appears to have issued this impugned order which in our considered opinion does not have any effect either of diluting the effect or object of any of the provisions of the Parent Act or adverse to the object for which the Act came to be enacted."

    The petitioner had also contended that the powers to issue the certificate could be exercised only up to a period of three years. Therefore, the impugned notification was valid only till 25.02.2022. The notification has ignored this duration and therefore, dehors the provisions of the Parent Act. It was essentially sought that all the certificates issued under the umbrella of the impugned orders be declared illegal.

    To address this contention, the Bench noted that 'competent authority' under Section 2(b) of the Parent Act was empowered to examine the application made under Section 3 and after satisfying itself about the genuineness of the application, the authority could issue the certificate. There were several provisions in the Act which provided for the issuance and the cancellation of the certificates and challenging the decision of the authority concerning the same. The impugned order (Annexure A) was enacted by the State of Gujarat and there seemed to be no conflict between the Act of 2018 and the Parent Act. The order was issued in exercise of powers under 19(1) of the Act of 2018 which did not have diluting effect on the objective or provisions of the Parent Act.

    The Bench, thereafter, ventured into the second impugned order (Annexure B) wherein powers were entrusted with the Mamlatdar, Taluka Development Officer and Assistant Commissioners to verify and issue certificates. Averring that there was no inconsistency in the two orders, the Bench noted that the second order did not bypass sections 4 and 6 of the Act of 2018.

    Accordingly, it was opined thus:

    "Not only the Public Interest Litigation appears to be devoid of merit, but it appears to be filed with ulterior purpose, which is not conveniently disclosed in the petition which obviously timed at the announcement of election to Local Self Government. Petitioners who are the members of Sacha Adivsai Adhikar Trust and Samast Adivasi Samaj, if aggrieved by any of those certificates, which are invalid according to them, can independently initiate appropriate proceedings known to law."

    While dismissing the PIL, the Court made a reference to Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr., 2021 SCC Online SC 463 wherein it was held:

    "…legislative enactment can be struck down only on two grounds : (1) that the appropriate legislature does not have the competence to make the law, and (ii) that it takes away or abridges any of the fundamental rights enumerated in Part III of the Constitution or any other constitutional provisions."

    Noting the lack of the aforesaid grounds for striking down the impugned orders, the High Court dismissed the PIL.

    Case Title: SACHA ADIVASI ADHIKAR TRUST Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

    Case No.: C/WPPIL/151/2021

    Click Here To Read/Download Order


    Tags
    Gujarat High CourtChief Justice Aravind KumarJustice Ashutosh J. ShastriCaste CertificateScheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (“SCs and STs”)Gujarat Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulations of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificates) Act 2018Other Backward Classes
    Next Story
    X