Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Basudev Sahoo Vs. Sub-collector and ors.

Basudev Sahoo vs Sub-collector and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Orissa Decided Sep 25, 2007
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/536695

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Orissa High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Family

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- Sections 100-A [As inserted by Act 22 of 2002], 110 & 104 & Letters Patent, 1865, Clause 10: [Dr. B.S. Chauhan, CJ, L. Mohapatra & A.S. Naidu, JJ] Letters Patent Appeal Order of Single Judge of High Court passed while deciding matters filed under Order 43, Rule1 of C.P.C., - Held, After introduction of Section ...

Key legal issue
Family

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Basudev Sahoo

Respondent

Sub-collector and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
105(2008)CLT275

Excerpt

.....chauhan, cj, l. mohapatra & a.s. naidu, jj] writ appeal held, a writ appeal shall lie against judgment/orders passed by single judge in a writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india. in a writ application filed under articles 226 and 227 of constitution, if any order/judgment/decree is passed in exercise of jurisdiction under article 226, a writ appeal will lie. but, no writ appeal will lie against a judgment/order/decree passed by a single judge in exercising powers of superintendence under article 227 of the constitution. - the tahsildar conducted some local enquiry, examined aforesaid sansar pradhan and some other villagers and without relying, upon the aforesaid decree of civil court held that he was not satisfied that the petitioner had in fact been adopted by sansar pradhan and, accordingly, refused to grant the caste certificate applied for by the petitioner. 3. in course of hearing as this court entertained some doubt, it called upon both the natural father and adoptive father of the petitioner to appear before this court, in consonance with the said direction both of them appeared before the court and submitted that in fact out of love and affection sansar has adopted the petitioner as his son. that apart, law is well settled that if a person belonging to general category is adopted by a family of reserved category, he will not be entitled to any benefit whatsoever enjoyed by the reserved category......him as the adopted son. the tahsildar conducted some local enquiry, examined aforesaid sansar pradhan and some other villagers and without relying, upon the aforesaid decree of civil court held that he was not satisfied that the petitioner had in fact been adopted by sansar pradhan and, accordingly, refused to grant the caste certificate applied for by the petitioner. being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the sub-collector, nayagarh which was registered as revenue misc.certificate appeal no. 2 of 1998. the sub-collector also without relying upon the judgment and decree passed by civil court in favour of the petitioner, dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the tahsildar. being aggrieved the petitioner has approached this court.2. learned counsel for the petitioner forcefully submitted before this court that the tahsildar and sub-collector were bound by the aforesaid decree passed by a civil court. he further submitted that the petitioner had not applied for the caste certificate for any specific purpose and, as such, there was no bar for the aforesaid authorities to issue such certificate.3. in course of hearing as this court entertained some doubt, it called upon both the natural father and adoptive father of the petitioner to appear before this court, in consonance with the said direction both of them appeared before the court and submitted that in fact out of love and affection sansar has adopted the petitioner as his son.4. learned counsel appearing for the state forcefully argued that if a person belonging to general category goes on adoption to the family of a reserved category, then he is not entitled to get any benefit whatsoever available to the reserved category persons. relying upon a decision of the supreme court reported in air 1969 sc 1011 he further submitted that no caste certificate can be granted in favour of the petitioner on the basis of a civil court decree for the purpose of utilizing the same in service or studies......

Full Judgment

A.S. Naidu, J.

1. The Petitioner had approached the Tahsildar, Nayagarh by fining a petition under the Miscellaneous Certificate Rules with a prayer to issue caste certificate in his favour. The said petition was registered as Misc. Certificate Case No. 1818 of 1998. According to the Petitioner he had been adopted by Shri Sansar Pradhan and the latter had no children. Certain disputes having cropped up with regard to his adoption he had filed a suit in the Court of the Civil Judge (JD),. Nayagarh with a prayer to declare him as the adopted son of said Sansar Pradhan. The said suit was registered as T.S. No. 10 of 1998 and a decree was passed therein on 8-7-1998 declaring him as the adopted son. The Tahsildar conducted some local enquiry, examined aforesaid Sansar Pradhan and some other villagers and without relying, upon the aforesaid decree of Civil Court held that he was not satisfied that the Petitioner had in fact been adopted by Sansar Pradhan and, accordingly, refused to grant the caste certificate applied for by the Petitioner. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner filed an appeal before the Sub-Collector, Nayagarh which was registered as Revenue Misc.Certificate Appeal No. 2 of 1998. The Sub-Collector also without relying upon the Judgment and decree passed by Civil Court in favour of the Petitioner, dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the Tahsildar. Being aggrieved the Petitioner has approached this Court.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner forcefully submitted before this Court that the Tahsildar and Sub-Collector were bound by the aforesaid decree passed by a Civil Court. He further submitted that the Petitioner had not applied for the caste certificate for any specific purpose and, as such, there was no bar for the aforesaid authorities to issue such certificate.

3. In course of hearing as this Court entertained some doubt, it called upon both the natural father and adoptive father of the Petitioner to appear before this Court, in consonance with the said direction both of them appeared before the Court and submitted that in fact out of love and affection Sansar has adopted the Petitioner as his son.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the State forcefully argued that if a person belonging to general category goes on adoption to the family of a reserved category, then he is not entitled to get any benefit whatsoever available to the reserved category persons. Relying upon a decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1969 SC 1011 he further submitted that no caste certificate can be granted in favour of the Petitioner on the basis of a civil Court decree for the purpose of utilizing the same in service or studies. But then the ratio of the said decision is not applicable to the present case, inasmuch the application filed by the Petitioner before the Tahsildar did not indicate that the certificate was necessary for any specific purpose. That apart, law is well settled that if a person belonging to general category is adopted by a family of reserved category, he will not be entitled to any benefit whatsoever enjoyed by the reserved category. Be that as it may, the Tahsildar and the Sub-Collector were bound by the decree passed by a Civil Court.

5. In view of the aforesaid clear position, and as the decree passed by the Civil Court is binding on all, the same having not been varied or reversed by any competent Court, this Court directs the Tahsildar to issue the caste certificate applied for by the Petitioner, but then with an endorsement by him on the said certificate that the same shall not be utilized for the purpose of education or Government service.

6. With the aforesaid direction the Writ application is disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial