1 2025:CGHC:56654 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3339 of 2021 Santosh Kumar Khadgi S/o Late Eknath Khadgi Aged About 41 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Grade-Iii At Office Of Assistant Commissioner, State Tax Rajnandgaon R/o Ward No. 45, Jeevan Colony, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Scheduled Tribe Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Through President-Cum-Secretary Department Of Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development, Tribal Research Training Institute, Pt. Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Sector-4, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Director Tribal Research And Training Centre Pt. Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Sector-4, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Member Of Secretary High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Vigilance Inspector Vigilance Cell, High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Zainab Vanak, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional Advocate General 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 20/11/2025 1. By way of filing instant writ petition, following relief(s) has been claimed by the petitioner: 10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned notice dated 12.07.2021 (Annexure P/1) and impugned notice dated 30.06.2020 (Anneuxre P/2) issued by the Vigilance Inspector, High Power Caste Scrutiny, Committee, Raipur (C.G.). 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner as per the facts & circumstance of the present case, in the ends of justice. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Assistant Grade-III on 12.02.1992 in the Office of Commercial Tax Officer, Dhamtari. The petitioner was selected on the said post being a member of Schedule Tribe Category “Halba”. Since then, he is performing his duty with due vigilance and sincerity. All of a sudden, a notice dated 30.06.2020 was issued by the Vigilance Inspector, High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, Raipur, respondent No. 2 herein indicating therein that his social status certificate has been sent for verification to the Vigilance Cell by respondent No. 2 and, therefore, various documents were sought for by respondent No. 2. With an identical narration, another notice dated 12.07.2021(Anneuxre P/1) was issued, which both of them are under challenge in the instant writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the verification of the social status certificate of the petitioner has to be done in accordance with 3 Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification), Act, 2013 (henceforth, 'Act, 2013') and Section 6 of the Act, 2013 provides for District Level Certificates Verification Committee and its power whereas Section 7 of the Act, 2013 provides for High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. She further submits that the impugned notices were issued by respondent No. 2 – High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee, which has no jurisdiction or authority to issue such notices until and unless, the certificate has been referred to it by the District Level Certificate verification Committee under Section 6 of the Act, 2013 or by the State Government. After any report is received by respondent No. 2 from the District Level Certificates verification Committee or from the State government, the respondent No. 3 cannot exercise its jurisdiction to ascertain the validity and correctness of the social certificate of the petitioner and it is denuded of the power to issue such notices asking the petitioner to submit certain documents for verification of his social status certificate. She further submits that this issue is no longer res integra in light of the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Smt. Vidya Kumbhare vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others {WPC No. 95 of 2021, decided on 30.01.2023}, which has also been affirmed by learned Division Bench of this Court in matter of State of Chhattisgarh & another vs. Smt. Vidya Kumbhare {WA No. 475 of 2024, decided on 30.07.2024}. Therefore, she submits that as the impugned notices were issued by an incompetent authority, the same deserve to be quashed. 4. Per contra, Mr. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the writ petition has been filed only against the show cause notices issued to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner can very well submit his reply and raise his objection before the respondent No. 2, who may decide the same in 4 accordance with law. Apart from this, he submits that no restrictive interpretation of Sections 6 & 7 of the Act, 2013 be given and as the respondent No. 2 is empowered to ascertain the validity and correctness of the social status certificate, it cannot be said that they cannot issue such certificate. As such, the writ petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The point, which comes for determination is, as to whether the issuance of impugned show cause notices (Annexure P/1 & P/2) by respondent No. 2 is issued with an authority or not. The submission has been made by Ms. Vanak that the jurisdiction to ascertain the validity of social status certificate by respondent No. 2 only comes in two contingency. Firstly when such recommendation or report has been made by District Level Certificates verification Committee, as created under Section 6 of the Act, 2013 or by State government. In the case in hand, perusal of impugned notices, does not indicate as to whether any such report was submitted by the District Level Certificates verification Committee to the respondent No. 2 or the issuance of notice was at the strength of some recommendations or directions or complaint made by the State Government. The purport of the notices clearly indicates that the social status certificate of the petitioner has to be enquired /investigated and for which the work has been handed over to the Vigilance Cell of respondent No. 2, certain documents which are mentioned is notices were demanded from the petitioner. In order to appreciate the controversy, it would be apt to quote Sections 6 & 7 of the Act, which reproduced below :- “6. District Level Certificates verification Committee and its powers. - (1) There shall be a District Level Certificates Verification Committee with such composition as may be 5 prescribed for verification of Social Status Certificate issued by the Competent Authority under Section 4, as may be notified by the State Government having jurisdiction over one or more districts. (2) A district Level Certificates Verification Committee shall on its own motion or on receipt of any information or reference made to it, in regard to Social Status Certificate(s) issued by the competent Authority, verify such Certificate(s) in the manner as may be prescribed. Provided that the reference made to the District Level Certificates Verification Committee by an employer, an Educational Institution, a Local Authority, the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, for verification of Social Status Certificate(s), shall be in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, and it shall be the duty of the District Certificates Verification Committee or report its findings to the employer, the Educational Institution, the Local Authority, the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the reference. (3) Where there is prima-facie reason to believe that the Social Status Certificate(s) have been wrongfully or fraudulently obtained, the District Level Certificates Verification Committee shall refer all information and relevant documents along with record of its findings to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee : Provided that where the District Level Certificates Verification Committee arrives at an adverse finding, it shall not refer the case to High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee unless a reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to the person, whose Social Status Certificate is disputed. (4) The District Level Certificates Verification Committee shall follow such procedure for verification of Social Status Certificates and adhere to such time limit for reference to the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee under sub-section (3) of this Section, as may be prescribed. 6 7. High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee. - (1) The State Government shall constitute, by notification in the Official Gazette, one or more High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee or Committees, for conducting enquiry into Social Status Certificate(s) referred to it by District Level Certificates Verification Committee under Section 6 or by the State Government, and it shall be the duty of the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee to examine the report of the District Level Certificates Verification Committee and to proceed in this matter as prescribed under Chapter IV of this Act. (2) The High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. Provided that where the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee decides to arrive at an adverse finding, it shall not do so unless a reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to the person whose Social Status Certificate is disputed.” 7. Perusal of these two provisions clearly indicates that respondent No. 2 can exercise its jurisdiction only into contingency as enumerated in Section 7 of the Act, 2013 firstly when the matter is referred by District Level Certificates verification Committee and Secondly by the State Government. 8. This Court in case of Smt. Vidya Kumbhare (Supra) has categorically held in paragraph 22 that the Act 2013 does not empower the High Powered Caste Scrutiny Committee to directly entertain a complaint and take cognizance and conduct an enquiry. This order was further upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 475 of 2024 (supra). 9. The return on behalf of respondents also does not reflect with certainty as to whether any enquiry was conducted with regard to social status certificate of the petitioner by the District Level Certificates verification Committee and the report was forwarded to the respondent No. 2 for examination/investigation. Return also does not speak as to whether such complaint or report was made or any request was made by the State 7 Government to the respondent No. 2 to ascertain the validity and correctness of the social status certificate of the petitioner. Thus, in light of the discussions made herein above and in light of the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench as well as the Division Bench of this Court, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned notices cannot sustain scrutiny of this Court and it appears to have been issued without jurisdiction therefore, the notices (Annexure P/1 and P/2) are set aside, however, liberty is reserved in favour of the State Government to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 10. With the aforesaid observation & direction, the writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge Ami AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.11.25 18:47:45 +0530