Caste Scrutiny Committee Cannot Review Its Own Decisions: Bombay High Court Restores Invalidated Caste Certificates
|The Bombay High Court held that the Caste Scrutiny Committee (CSC) is not authorized to review its own decisions under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (Act).
Several members of Scheduled Tribes filed writ petitions challenging the CSC’s decision to invalidate their caste certificates. The Petitioners had obtained tribe/caste certificates between 1992 and 2005, with the CSC validating them from 2005 to 2012. However, a decade or more later, the Committee issued show-cause notices, eventually revoking the validity of the certificates.
The Court set aside the order of the CSC that invalidated the issued certificates. The Court noted that the CSC must abide by the same strict rules, including limitations periods, applicable to review petitions in general. Additionally, the Court emphasized that any decision of the CSC, including those involving fraud allegations, is subject to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The Bench comprising Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Jitendra Jain observed, “We have categorically held that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no jurisdiction, much less inherent jurisdiction to review its own decisions, as any decision as rendered by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution including issue on issues of any allegation of fraud”.
Advocate Ravindra Adsure appeared for the Petitioners and Special Prosecutor Nitin Gangal with Additional Government Pleaders P. N. Diwan and S.S. Bhende appeared for the State.
Ten Writ Petitions were filed before the High Court challenging the orders from the CSC in Maharashtra. These orders, issued under the Act, involved the committee recalling previous decisions validating tribe/caste certificates of the Petitioners. The Petitioners, belonging to Scheduled Tribes (KoliMahadeo, Thakur, and Thakar), had received and acted upon these certificates, impacting their employment and education. The Petitions were divided into two groups, with the first challenging orders recalling the earlier decisions, and the second contesting a show cause notice from the committee, initiating a suo motu review of the validity granted to the tribe/caste certificates.
The Court framed the following issue: “whether the Caste Scrutiny Committee as constituted under the 2000 Act would have jurisdiction to “suo motu review” its past orders granting Caste Validity Certificates to the petitioners”.
Relying on the Supreme Court Judgment in Naresh Kumar & Ors. v Government (NCT of Delhi) [2019 SCC 416], the Court reiterated that review power is only permissible if explicitly provided for in the statute. The Court observed the ramifications of granting such review power to the Committee, underscoring the potential for uncertainty and absurdity in its functioning. The Bench noted the arbitrary nature of allowing the Committee to independently determine misrepresentation or fraud in a case. Stressing the quasi-judicial role of the CSC and the absence of legislatively conferred review powers, the Bench held that the Committee lacked the jurisdiction for suo motu reviews.
“The Court after examining the scheme of the legislation and the purport of these provisions, categorically held that the legislature consciously has avoided to confer any power of review on the Caste Scrutiny Committee to review/revisit its own decision even in case of fraud, misrepresentation or suppression of material facts. It was observed that, in fact, this would defeat the mandate of sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the 2000 Act.”, the Bench noted.
The Court highlighted that review jurisdiction typically adheres to stringent rules, including limitations, and the CSC should not be exempt from these norms. The Court referred to the case of Rakesh Bhimashankar Umbarje & Ors. v State of Maharashtra, Tribal Development Department & Anr [2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1013]. The Bench observed that decisions of the CSC could only be subject to review by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
“Even from such perspective, it cannot be held that any inherent powers of review are conferred on the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Even otherwise considering the nature of functions of the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the legislature itself has avoided to confer any review powers which could have been conferred by the legislature, as observed by the Division Bench of this Court in Rakesh Bhimashankar Umbarje (supra)”, the Bench observed.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Petitions, restored the validity of the certificates, and set aside the impugned orders of the CSC.
Cause Title: Bharat Nagu Garud v State Of Maharashtra (2023:BHC-AS:35149-DB)