District Collector Bound By Procedure Prescribed For Ascertaining Genuineness Of SC/ST Certificate: Madras High Court

The Madras High court recently set aside the order of the District Collector, Theni District wherein the Collector had adjudicated upon the genuineness of a community certificate based upon the report of an Anthropologist and the enquiry report of the Sub-collector.

The division bench of Justice S.S.Sundar and Justice S. Srimathy observed as under:

Leave alone the specific contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner with regard to the community status, the fact that the District Collector has passed the impugned order without following the procedure as contemplated under the two Government Orders referred to above, is not in dispute...This Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the fifth respondent is not sustainable. Hence, the matter has to be remitted to the District Level Vigilance Committee, to consider the issue afresh in relation to the community status of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders following the procedure...

The petition was filed by the Village Panchayat President of G.Kallupatti Village. She submitted that she belongs to Hindu Kuravan Community which comes under the Schedule Caste community. She was issued the Community Certificate after making an application to the Tahsildar. Later, a show-cause notice was issued by the District Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Officer (4th respondent) on 08.02.2021 based on a representation made by the sixth respondent who had also contested the election as a rival candidate.

The show-cause notice stated that an inquiry was contemplated regarding the community status of the petitioner. Thereafter the impugned order was passed by the District Collector (5th respondent). The respondents had opined that the petitioner belongs to the Hindu Uppiliyar community, which comes under the Backward Class.

The petitioner, represented by R. Gandhi submitted that the order of the District Collector was made based on the report of the Anthropologist, dated 10.03.2021 and the enquiry report of the Sub-Collector. It was also contended that the respondent had not followed the procedures laid down under G.O.(2D) No.108 and G.O(Ms).No.106 issued in 2007 and 2012 respectively by the Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department following the directions of the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhiri Patil and another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others. In the above decision, the court had directed the constitution of the District Level Vigilance Committee at District level and State Level Scrutiny Committee at the State level, to verify the genuineness of the community certificate issued to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

As per the 2007 GO, the District Level Vigilance Committee, should consist of District Collector as a Chairman and District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer as a Member Secretary and an Anthropologist as a Member, to scrutinize the genuineness of the community certificates issued as Scheduled Caste. On receipt of an application, the committee shall call for the records from the local revenue authority by whom such Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe certificate was issued. On receipt of report, if the certificate was found to be not genuine, a show case notice was issued which was to be replied within two weeks.

If the candidate sought an opportunity of hearing, the same was to be allowed by convening the meeting of the committee. After enquiry, if the report of the committee was against the candidate, the certificate would be canceled and confiscated. The committee should ensure that the candidate is prosecuted for making a false claim. The committee shall also send communications to the institute or appointing authority requesting them to cancel the admission or appointment.

Subsequently in 2012, the Government through another GO, set up Regional Vigilance Cells consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police, jurisdictional Inspector of Police, and Police Constable, to verify the community status. As per this GO, on an application for scrutinization or verification of community certificate, the District Vigilance Committee or the State Level Scrutiny Committee is required to refer the case to the Vigilance Cell who shall personally verify all facts regarding the social status claimed. Thereafter, on receipt of the report from the Vigilance Officer, a further enquiry had to be conducted. 

The petitioner submitted that due procedure was not followed while scrutinizing the community certificate. It was also submitted that though the District Collector had concluded that no one belonging to Hindu Kuravan community was residing in the village, the petitioner through an RTI came to know that several persons from the region who belonged to the community had received their community certificates.

The court was satisfied that the order was not sustainable. Hence, it remitted the matter back to the District Level Vigilance Committee, to consider the issue and pass appropriate orders following the procedure. 

Case Title: P Maheswari v. The Secretary to Government

Case No: WP (MD) No. 8424 of 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 268

Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.R.Gandhi

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader (R1-5), Mr.R.Karunanidhi (R6)