The Orissa High Court in the case Jayanti Naik v. State of Odisha And Ors observed and has ordered an appellate authority for reconsidering an appeal filed against denial of tribe certificate to a boy who was being brought up by his tribal mother. Thus, the said women has been deserted by her non-tribal husband.
The Single Judge Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha in the case observed that the appellate authority thereafter went on to take view that the Tahsildar had properly followed the procedures as per the rules and regulations stated, thus, the court rejected the application filed by the applicant. On the facts that the petitioner for bringing up of her son in the tribal community the boy was not even looked at.
In the present case, the petitioner, who belongs to a scheduled tribe, married a person who being from the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes, SEBC. Moreover, the husband deserted her and the child from the wedlock was being brough up by the mother of husband in the tribe.
Therefore, the Tahsildar rejected the application for caste certificate in respect of the child and aggrieved with the same, an appeal was made by the appellate authority, i.e. the Collector, Sambalpur. Thus, the mother being aggrieved by the order, approached the High Court by filing the writ petition.
Before the court, the petitioner submitted that the court disposed of the appeal, without even calling for records from the Tahsildar which being on the basis of a letter of the Tahsildar, thus, without ascertaining veracity of the statement which are made by him. It has also been recorded by the court that the rule and regulations has been followed by Tahsildar and the same is justified in rejecting the application.
The court in the case observed and has noted that the appellate authority went on to take the view that the procedures are properly been followed by the Tahsildar while rejecting the application of the appellant and the same being as per stated rules and regulations. It has also been stated that while doing so, the assertion of petitioner regarding bringing up of her son in the tribal community was not even considered by the court.
Accordingly, the court restored the appeal to the Collector, who was the director for reconsidering the appeal expeditiously within six weeks, thus, the court set aside the order.
