Gopichand Sahu v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 734 of 2017 Gopichand Sahu S/o Late B. S. Sahu, Aged About 36 Years Advocate Social And R T I Activist R/o Sarvoday Nagar Panchpedinaka Raipur & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary Department Of G A D, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. The Commissioner (Revenue), Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

3. The Collector, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

4. Smt. Shobhna Balde, Present Working As Assistant Grade Ill Under Choice And Freedom Fighter Branch Collector Office Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate For State :

Shri Sangharsh Pandey, Dy. Govt. Advocate S.B.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 11/04/2017 Heard.

1. The petitioner, who is a RTI activist, has filed this petition seeking a direction to the official respondent to hold an inquiry on his complaint that respondent No.4 does not belong to scheduled caste category and is wrongly taking benefit of reserved category status. This petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that no inquiry is being held on his complaint.

2. Section 15 of the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Rules, 2013 (in short "Rules of 2013") framed under the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (in short "Act of 2013") provides that on complaint made,

-2the complaint would be inquired into. I need not reproduce the entire details of the provision as at this stage, the petitioner only seeks direction for verification and examination of his complaint by the competent authority.

3. Learned counsel for the State submits that complaint of the petitioner shall be inquired into in accordance with the provision of the Act and Rules by the competent authority.

4. In view of the submission so made by learned counsel for the State, the petition, at this stage, is disposed off. The Collector, who happens to be the employer of respondent No.4 shall proceed in accordance with Law and the provisions of the Act of 2013 and Rules of 2013 in the matter of verification and inquiry. The competent authority is expected to take appropriate decision on the complaint as early as possible.

5. It is made clear that in any such inquiry, respondent No.4 shall be afforded due and proper opportunity of hearing.

Sd/--- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen