1 CGHC010308372021 2026:CGHC:39309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4797 of 2021 1 - Dev Prasad Jaiswal S/o Late Govardhan Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village And Post Tapkara, Police Station Tapkara, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Police Station Rani, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh State Schedule Tribe Commission, 61- Jal Vihar Colony, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.D.O.P. Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Tahsildar, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Jagmohan Kalo S/o Late Sahdev Kalo R/o Village Tapkara, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For State :- Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, P.L. 2 For Respondent No.5 :- Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB-Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08.09.2026 1. The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred assailing the notice dated 02.09.2021 (Annexure P/1) issued by Respondent No.2 – Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Aayog. 2. Following reliefs have been prayed in this petition:- “I This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue order/orders, writ/writs and direction/directions to respondent no 2 for strict compliance of their own jurisdiction and ought not to exceed the same while interring into Police or jurisdiction of judicial system. II This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition & quash the annexure P/1 dated 02-09-2021, in the interest of justice. III That petitioner respectfully invites the kind attention toward.. the main issue that this mass is all because there is no format in which the basic requirements would have been mentioned therefore all these cases are arising and create problem and destroy harmony in the society, thus any guideline should also be drawn or direct the 3 Resp. no 2 to frame such guideline for filling any application before the Resp. no 2 in the interest of far reaching effects and larger impact upon the society and also in the interest of justice. IV Any other relief/relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice dated 02.09.2021 has been issued by Respondent No.2 on the complaint made by Respondent No.5. By the said notice, the petitioner has been directed to file his reply and to remain present before the Commission on 24.09.2021 along with relevant documents. It is contended that the Aayog has no power and authority to issue such notice and to call upon the petitioner in the manner done. The Aayog has exceeded its jurisdiction and is encroaching upon the jurisdiction of police and judicial authorities. Hence, the impugned notice is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the impugned notice is in consonance with law. The Commission is duly empowered under Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Jati Tatha Anusuchit Janjati Aayog Adhiniyam, 1995. The Commission, while exercising civil powers conferred upon it, is competent to take cognizance upon a complaint made by a member of Scheduled Tribe and call upon the concerned parties for explanation and for production of relevant documents. There is no material on record to demonstrate that the 4 Commission has transgressed its statutory limits. The notice is well within the ambit and powers of the Aayog and does not warrant any interference by this Court under writ jurisdiction. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record, particularly the impugned notice dated 02.09.2021 (Annexure P/1). 6. On perusal of the notice, it is apparent that the Aayog, upon receipt of a complaint from Respondent No.5, has merely called upon the petitioner to submit his reply and to appear before it along with relevant documents. Such an act of calling for explanation and summoning the parties for enquiry falls within the powers conferred under Section 10 of the Act of 1995, which vests the Commission with powers of a Civil Court. The notice is procedural in nature and does not decide any rights of the parties finally. 7. This Court does not find any jurisdictional error or perversity in issuance of the said notice. No case is made out to hold that the Aayog has exceeded its jurisdiction. The petitioner is bound to participate in the proceedings and place his defence before the Commission along with all relevant documents. The apprehension that the Aayog would exceed its jurisdiction is premature at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed. 5 9. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a detailed reply to the notice dated 02.09.2021 and to apprise the concerned Aayog of all relevant facts and documents. 10. No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha