The Supreme Court issued directives regarding the procedure for canceling caste certificates following scrutiny, particularly in Navneet Kaur Rana’s case. This decision provides clarity on the cancellation process, offering guidance for cases involving caste certificate revocation after scrutiny, thereby impacting similar cases in the future. Navneet Kaur Rana’s case serves as a precedent for understanding the legal framework surrounding caste certificate cancellation procedures.
NEW DELHI: On 21st February, the Supreme Court gives direction regarding the challenge to the annulment of MP Navneet Kaur Rana’s caste certificate. Rana, her brother Showik, and their father faced the cancellation of their certificates, which were initially validated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee (CSC) in 2017, acknowledging their membership in the “Mochi” Schedule Caste.
READ ALSO: Delhi High Court Approves UCMS Control From Delhi University to Delhi Government
The decision came under scrutiny following a Bombay High Court order in 2021. The court examined the various facets of the case, including the nature and validation of the caste certificate, the jurisdictional aspects, and the procedural requirements outlined in the relevant legislation.
The background of the case, Navneet Kaur’s election to the Lok Sabha from Maharashtra’s Amravati constituency in 2019, marked by a legal challenge to her caste status. The Supreme Court intervened to stay the Bombay High Court’s cancellation order in 2021, amidst debates over the recognition of the “Mochi” caste.
READ ALSO: Manipur Violence Case| Manipur High Court Cancels Meitei Community’s Inclusion in ST List
Representatives Abhinav Chandrachud and Prasanna Bhangale, advocating for Chakraborty, emphasized Mumbai’s jurisdiction, citing the residency of both parties and the location of investigative activities. Similarly, Advocate Ayaz Khan, representing Showik and their father, emphasized Mumbai’s jurisdiction and argued against the unwarranted issuance of Look-Out Circulars (LOCs) without substantial evidence of evasion. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta highlighted the procedural intricacies concerning the validation and verification of caste certificates, referencing pertinent legislation and judicial precedents.
The court also looked into the legal framework established by the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act of 2000.
The Act mandates the process of application, verification, and issuance of caste certificates, imposing the burden of proof on the claimant. Furthermore, the bench examined the rules and procedures outlined in the 2012 regulations, specifying the composition and functions of the committees.
READ ALSO: Byju’s |Karnataka High Court Grants Interim Relief, Puts EGM Ouster on Hold
“Section 7 and 8 if you see, the burden to prove is caste upon the applicant, so he discharges that burden once he satisfies the scrutiny committee then, when the certificate is issued and if it found to be false, what is the procedure once it has been granted? Secondly, on whom would the presumption lie? The burden and onus on proving the falsity would be upon whom?”
the bench verbally remarked
Justice Karol raised pertinent questions regarding the procedure for cancellation of certificates and the allocation of burden in proving their validity. The senior counsel indicated further examination of these aspects in subsequent hearings.
CASE TITLE: Navneet Kaur vs The State of Maharashtra (SLP [C] No. 7776/2021)