Miss Lucy
Try free
← All judgments

Rampal vs State Of Haryana & Ors

Supreme Court4 August 2009Tarun Chatterjee · R.M. Lodha

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Before cancelling a caste certificate, the administrative authority must afford the certificate holder an opportunity of hearing and permit him to contend that the certificate is validly issued as a Scheduled Caste Certificate; violation of these principles of natural justice vitiates the cancellation order and requires that the matter be decided afresh after granting a hearing and passing a reasoned order.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5076 OF 2009[Arising out of SLP) No.13023 of 2008]
Rampal ----Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. ----Respondents
JUDGMENT
TARUN CHATTERJEE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated 30th of April, 2008 passed by a Division Bench of
the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
in CWP No.4215 of 2007.
3. The appellant, at the relevant point of time, was
working as a Constable but he got entry in service by
producing a caste certificate showing him as a
scheduled caste candidate. It appears that one2
complaint was made against him that he got the said
certificate wrongly, by showing himself as belonging to
`Sirkiband' caste whereas in fact he belongs to
`Banjara' caste, which cannot be said to be a
"Scheduled Caste". On enquiry by the Tehsildar, this
certificate of the appellant was cancelled. It was the
grievance of the appellant that before cancelling the
certificate, no opportunity of hearing was granted to
him and accordingly, the order of cancellation must be
set aside.
4. Challenging the order of cancellation, a writ
application was moved by the appellant before the
High Court, which, by the impugned order was
dismissed.
5. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed this special leave
petition, which on grant of leave was heard in presence
of the learned counsel for the parties.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
examined the impugned order and other materials on
record. In our view, the appeal is liable to be allowed

and the impugned order should also be set aside on a 3

very short point. It is an admitted position that before

cancellation of the caste certificate of the appellant,

the authorities ought to have given an opportunity of

hearing to the appellant and also to contend that the

Certificate issued to him was a "Scheduled Caste

Certificate" and, therefore, it cannot be quashed. In

view of the fact that the principles of natural justice

was admittedly violated in this case, the impugned

order must be set aside and the concerned Tehsildar

must be directed to decide the dispute regarding the

caste certificate of the appellant after giving hearing to

the parties and after passing a reasoned order,

preferably within three months from the date of supply

of a copy of this order to him.

7. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is thus

allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no

order as to costs.

..................................J. [Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi; .................................J. 4

August 04, 2009. [R.M.Lodha]

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free