# Baldev Singh v. Tehsildar Bilaspur, Rampur and others

- **Citation:** (2000) 3 ILRA 167
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2000
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/baldev-singh-v-tehsildar-bilaspur-rampur-and-others-39650
- **Pages:** 6

## Text

3All] Baldev Singh V. Tehsildar Bilaspur, Rampur and others 167

 The officer concerned responsible
for maintenance of record and for
interpolation the service record should be
brought to book. It is further directed that
the respondents shall ensure release of
petitioner's post retrial benefits. The
respondents are directed to 18% interest
per annum on amount due for delayed
payment for no fault of the employees on
the petitioner held in the recent judgement
of the Apex Court in 2000 (1) Allahabad
Civil Journal 824. Also reference be
made tot he cases reported in 1996 (Vol.
37) III AWC 1525 (DB), 1982 UPLC
1097 (DB).

13. Writ petition is allowed with
costs which I quantity at Rs.25000/- to be
paid within one month of receipt of
judgement and to be recovered from the
erring official.

25
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21
%/( 6+<$0$/ .80$5 6(1& -
7+( +21
%/( 6+<$0$/ .80$5 6(1& -
7+( +21
%/( *3 0$7+85 -
7+( +21
%/( *3 0$7+85 -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

%DOGHY 6LQJK
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
7HKVLOGDU %LODVSXU 5DPSXU DQG RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL 53 6LQJK
6KUL 0XUOLGKDU
6KUL .3 8SDGK\D\D
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6KUL 53 *RHO
$GYRFDWH *HQHUDO

$UWLFOH RI WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD
$ -DW 6LNK EHLQJ DOVR D -DW LV IXOO\
FRYHUHG E\ HQWU\ RI 6FKHGXOH , RI
 DQG LV D PHPEHU RI EDFNZDUG FODVV
DV LV GHILQHG XQGHU VHFWLRQ %% RI 83
3DQFK\DW 5DM $FW
+HOG 3DUD

-DW
6LNK
EHLQJ
DOVR
D

-DW
LV
IXOO\
FRYHUHG E\ HQWU\ RI 6FKHGXOH , RI
 $FW DQG LV D PHPEHU RI EDFNZDUG
FODVV
7KH
SHWLWLRQHU
LV
WKHUHIRUH
HQWLWOHG WR EH LVVXHG D FHUWLILFDWH WKDW KH
EHORQJV
WR
D
EDFNZDUG
FODVV
DQG
LV
HOLJLEOH
WR
FRQWHVW
IRU
WKH
RIILFH
RI
$GK\DNVKD
=LOD
3DQFKD\DW
5DPSXU
ZKLFK KDV EHHQ UHVHUYHG IRU D SHUVRQ
EHORQJLQJ WR WKH VDLG FRPPXQLW\

By the Court

1. The petitioner a 'Jat Sikh' was
elected as s member of Zila Panchyat,
Rampur, in the election held for various
Panchyats in the State in June 2000 in
accordance with section 18(1)(b) of U.P.
Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats
Adhinlyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to
as the Zila Panchyat Adhiniyam). The
office of Adhyaksha of Zila Panchyat
Rampur has been reserved for a person
belonging
to
backward
class
in
accordance with section 19-A of the
Adhiniyam.. The petitioner wanted to
contest the election for the office of
Adhyaksha and for that purpose he moved
an application of July 10,2000 before the
Tehsildar of his area for being issued a
certificate that he belongs to a backward
class. The Tehsildar directed an enquiry
and after receiving a report passed an
order on July 11, 2000 holding that the
petitioner did not belong to backward
class. The persent writ petition has been
filed praying that the order of the
Tehsildar be quashed and a writ of
mandamus be issued to the respondents
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000

168
commanding them to issue a certificate to
the effect that the petitioner belongs to
backward class.

2. Section 2(8) of Zila Panchyat
Adhiniyam
provides
that
'backward
classes' in the act shall have the meaning
assigned to it in U.P. Panchayat Raj Act,
1947. Section 2(bb) of U.P. Panchayat
Raj Act defines backward classes' and it
means the backward class of citizens
specified in Schedule-I of the U.P. Public
Services
(Reservation
for
Scheduled
Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other
Backward Classes) Act, 1994 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act). Section 2(b) of this
Act lays down that for the purposes of the
Act 'other backward classes of citizens'
mean the backward classes of citizens
specified in Schedule-I. At the time when
the Act was originally enacted, Schedule-I
contained names of 55 castes, which were
recognised
as
backward
classes.
Subsequently,
by notifications issued
from time to time, some more castes were
added and finally by a notification issued
on May 10, 2000 'Jat' has been included
as item no. 78.

3. The claim of the petitioner for
being issued a certificate of backward
class is founded on the aforesaid entry 78
whereby 'Jat' has been included as a
backward class. The case of the petitioner
is that as he is a 'Jat Sikh' he comes within
the aforesaid entry of Jat and he is entitled
for being issued a certificate that he
belongs to backward class. Sri Murlidhar,
learned senior counsel for the petitioner,
has contended that the preamble of the
Constitution lays emphasis on securing to
all citizens justice, social, economic and
political and also equality of status and of
opportunity and this is sought to be
achieved by Article 38, which finds place
in Part IV relating to Directive Principles
of State Policy, and with that end in view
section 19-A has been inserted in the Zila
Panchayats Adhiniyam, which provides
that the office of the Adhyaksha of the
Zila Panchyats shall be reserved for
persons
belonging
to
he
Scheduled
Castes,
Scheduled
Tribes
and
the
Backward Classes. The Schedule of the
1994
Act
enumerates
the
castes,
irrespective of religion of the person of
the caste and, as 'Jat' has been notified as
a backward class, the petitioner who is a
'Jat Sikh' is entitled to be issued a
Certificate of backward class in order to
enable him to contest the election of
Adhyaksha of Zila Panchyat of his district
which has been reserved for a person
belonging to the said class. The learned
Advocate
General
has,
however,
submitted that the castes designated as
backward
classes
and
included
in
Schedule-I of 1994 Act have been
identified on the basis of religion and
entry 78 which mentions 'Jat' means a
Hindu Jat and not a Sikh Jat.

4. What would constitute 'backward
classes of citizens' has been examined in
great detail in Indra Sawhney Versus
Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 477, and in
the
leading
judgment
delivered
by
Hon'ble B.P. Jeewan Reddy-J with whom
4 other Hon'ble judges agreed, it was
observed as follows in para 83 of the
reports:-
"......Coming back to the question of
identification, the fact remains that one
has to begin somewhere - with some
group, class or section. There is no set or
recognised method. There is no law or
other statutory Instrument prescribing the
methodology. The ultimate idea is to
survey the entire populace. If so, one can
will begin with castes, which represent
3All] Baldev Singh V. Tehsildar Bilaspur, Rampur and others 169

explicit
identifiable
social
classes/groupings, more particularly when
Art. 16(4) seeks to ameliorate social
backwardness...The concept of 'caste' in
this behalf is not confined to castes
among Hindus. It extends to castes,
wherever
they
obtain
as
a
fact,
irrespective of religious sanction for such
practice. Having exhausted the castes or
simultaneously with it, the authority may
take
up
for
consideration
other
occupational groups, communities and
classes. For example, it may take up the
Muslim community (after excluding those
sections, castes and groups, If any, who
have already been considered) and find
out whether it can be characterised as a
backward class in that State or region, as
the case may be. The approach may differ
from State to State since the conditions in
each State may differ. Nay, even within a
State conditions may differ from region to
region. Similarly, Christians may also be
considered. If in a given place, like
Kerala, there are several denominations,
sections or divisions, each of these groups
may separately be considered. In this
manner
all
the
classes
among
the
populace will be covered and that is the
central idea............"

Again, in para 207, it was stated as
follows:-

"It is said that the caste system is
unknown to other communities such as
Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jews, Parsis,
Jains, etc. in whose respective religion,
the caste system is not recognised and
permitted. But in practice, it cannot be
irrefutably
asserted
that
Islam,
Christianity, Sikhism are all completely
immune from casteism."

Then in para 210, it was observed as
follows:-

"Though
Christianity
does
not
acknowledge caste system, the evils of
caste system in some States are as
prevalent as in Hindu society especially
among the converts......"

With regard to Sikhs, it was observed as
follows:-

"It is further not correct to say that the
caste system is prevalent only among the
Hindu, and other religions are free from
it................As regards Sikhs, there is
no doubt that the Sikh religion does not
recognise caste system. It was in fact a
revolt against it. However, the existence
of Mazhabis, Kabirpanthis, Ramdasias,
Baurias, Sareras and Sikligars and the
demand of the leaders of the Sikhs
themselves to treat as Scheduled Castes
Could not be ignored and form the
beginning they have been notified as a
Scheduled Caste.........."

5. The conclusion of Hon'ble R.M.
Sahai, J. who gave a dissenting opinion
on certain issues, have been mentioned in
para 700 and sub-para (3) thereof reads as
follows:-

"(3) Reservation under Article 16(4)
being for any class of citizens and citizen
having been defined in Chapter II of the
Constitution includes not only Hindus but
Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Budhs, Jains,
etc. the principle of identification has to
be of universal application so as to extend
to every community and not only to those
who are either converts form Hindus or
some of whom to (who) carry same
occupation as same of the Hindus."
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000

170
6. In view of the above noted
authoritative pronouncement by a bench
of nine judges, there cannot be even a
slightest doubt that the identification of
backward class has to be done on the
basis of caste and the system of caste is
not confined to Hindus alone but is
prevalent amongst other castes including
Sikhs.

7. 'Jat' caste has been recognised as a
backward class in view of its entry in
Schedule-I of the 1994 Act. The entry as
it is, does not make reference to any
particular religion. Therefore, there is no
reason at all to treat a 'Jat' would come
within the ambit and sweep of the entry
'Jat' and, therefore, belongs to a backward
class.

8. Indra Sawhney (supra) has laid
down in no uncertain terms that as a fact
there are castes amongst the followers of
other religions like Muslims, Christians
and Sikhs in India though the aforesaid
religions by themselves neither recognise
nor permit a caste system. Islam and
Christianity did not have their origin in
India but came from outside. But Sikh as
a religion or faith was born in India and it
was the Hindus of India who adopted it as
their religion. The names of Sikhs are
akin to that of Hindus of the region and
the Sikhs are also governed by Hindus
Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, etc.
Therefore, for a Sikh to belong to 'Jat
caste is all the more natural and probable
in comparison to a Muslim or Christian.
There is nothing inherently wrong or
contradictory for a person belonging to
Sikh faith to be member of 'Jat' caste.
Being a Jat he will be a person belonging
to a backward class in view of 1994 Act.

9. Sri Murlidhar, learned senior
counsel for the petitioner and also the
learned Advocate General have referred to
certain castes enumerated in Schedule-I to
get
support
for
their
respective
submissions. Sri Murlidhar has submitted
that certain castes like Chikwa (entry 18),
Kunjra (entry 12), Banjara (entry 31) and
Darzi (entry 25) are found amongst
Hindus and Muslims both, which shows
that the identification of backward classes
has been done only on the basis of caste
and it has no correlation with religion.
Learned Advocate General has referred to
'Muslims Kayasth' (entry 45), and Raj
Sikh (entry 56) and has submitted on their
basis that only one caste amongst Sikh
namely, 'Raj Sikh' has been identified as
backward class. In our opinion, entry 45
and 56 show that wherever a particular
caste was in existence in more than one
religious
group
and
the
Legislature
wanted to include persons of that caste of
only one religion, the same has been
specified by also mentioning the name of
the religion. 'Kayasth' is a caste in Hindus
but the Legislature did not want to treat
them as backward class and, therefore, the
entry was specifically confined to
Muslims by mentioning as 'Muslim
Kayasth' which clearly excludes Hindus
Kayasth. Some people belonging to
Bhumihar caste in U.P. and Bihar write
their
surname
as
'Raj'.
Here
the
Legislature deliberately mentioned the
word 'Raj Sikh' faith alone as backward
class. Therefore, the aforesaid entries do
not at all support the case of the State and
on the contrary strengthen the petitioner's
case that the entry would also include
persons belonging to the said caste even
though they may be professing Sikh faith.

10. Learned Advocate General has
next contended that the Legislature has
3All] Baldev Singh V. Tehsildar Bilaspur, Rampur and others 171

enacted U.P. State Commission for
backward Classes Act, 1996 and section 9
thereof imposes an obligation on the State
Commission
for
backward
Classes
constituted under section 3 of the said Act
to examine requests for inclusion of any
class of citizens as a backward class in the
Schedule and hear complaints of noninclusion
of
any
such
class.
The
Commission has power to investigate and
monitor all matters relating to the
safeguards provided for the backward
class. It is contended on the basis of
averments made in the counter affidavit
(which has been filed by a Deputy
Secretary
of
Backward
Welfare
Department, Government of U.P.), that at
the time of inclusion of 'Jat' caste in the
Schedule, the Government had only
examined the social and educational
status of Hindu Jats and no such survey
was made with regard to jat Sikhs. It has
been further urged that 'Jat Sikhs' never
raised any grievance nor made any
demand for their inclusion in the list.
Reference has also been drawn to a letter
sent by Deputy Secretary of U.P.
Government on June 2, 2000 to the
Commissioner of Moradabad Division,
wherein, clarification was made that 'Jat
Sikh' has not been included as a backward
class. In our opinion, the contention raised
is wholly misconceived, as the fact that
Jat Sikhs did not make any demand for
being included in backward class is
wholly
irrelevant
for
deciding
the
controversy. The non making of demand
by them would not mean that they should
be deprived of what is lawfully due to
them, especially the opportunity to contest
for an elected office, which in law, is
available to them. The entry in the
Schedule has to be given its plain
meaning and has to be understood in a
common sense way. The Fact that the
State Government did not conduct a
survey with regard to the Sikhs or that the
Sikhs did not make any demand for their
inclusion in the Schedule cannot after the
meaning of the entry. If the State
Government did not perform its statutory
duty or did not make the necessary
inquiry before issuing the notification for
including the Jats as a backward class it
cannot change or after the meaning of the
entries made in the Schedule. The power
to amend the Schedule has been can
feared by section 13 of 1994 Act, which
provides that the State Government may,
by notification, amend the Schedule and
upon the publication of such notification
in the Gazetee, the Schedule shall be
demand to be amended accordingly. The
notification issued for amending the
Schedule has been given considerable
importance and the Legislature has given
ample
safeguards
for
that
purpose.
Section 14 provides that any notification
issued under section 13 shall be laid, as
soon as it any be, before both the Houses
of State Legislature and the provisions of
sub-section (1) of section 23-A of U.P.
General clauses Act, 1904, shall apply as
they apply in respect of rules made by the
State Government under any U.P. Act.
Therefore,
the
notification
issued
including 'Jat' as a backward class has
also received concurrence from both the
Houses of State Legislature. The letter
sent
by
the
Deputy
Secretary
of
Government of U.P. on June 2, 2000 is
wholly irrelevant as he has no authority in
law to tell as to how an entry made in the
Schedule should be interpreted. It any be
pointed out that it is settled law that even
the speeches made by the members of the
Constituent Assembly in the course of the
debates on the draft constitution cannot be
treated as extrinsic aid to the construction
of the Constitution (see State of Trav. Co.
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000

172
Versus Bombay Co. ltd., AIR 1952 SC
366). Similarly, the debates in Parliament
for
a
bill are not admissible for
construction
of
the
Act
which
is
ultimately enacted (see Aswini Kumar
gosh vs. State of madras, AIR 1950 SC
27). The Court has to be solely guided by
the language used in the enactment and
has to give plain meaning to the words
used therein. Therefore, the contention
based upon the fact that proper survey
was not done or no demand has been
raised by the 'Jat Sikh' for their inclusion
in backward class is wholly misconceived
and cannot be accepted.

11. Learned Advocate General has
referred to s. Swvigaradoss Versus Zonal
Manager, FCI, (1996) 3 SSC 100 and has
urged on its basis that the Court has no
power
to
alter
the
notification
or
Schedule. In our opinion, the authority
cited has no application to the facts of the
case By holding that a 'Jat Sikh' is also
included in the entry 'Jat', we are not
altering or modifying the said entry but
are merely holding that it would include a
person belonging to the said caste though
professing Sikh faith.

12. In view of the discussion made
above, we are clearly of the opinion that a
'Jat Sikh' being also a 'Jat' is fully covered
by entry 78 of Schedule-I of 1994 Act and
is a member of backward class. The
petitioner is, therefore, entitled to be
issued a certificate that he belongs to a
backward class and is eligible to contest
for
the
office
of
Adhyaksha,
Zila
Panchyat, Rampur, which has been
reserved for a person belonging to the
said community.

13. The writ petition succeeds and is
hereby allowed with costs. The impugned
order dated July 11, 2000 passed by
respondent no. 1 is quashed and the
respondents are commanded by a writ of
mandamus to issue a certificate to the
petitioner that he belongs to backward
class. By an interim order passed on July
31, 2000, it was directed that the
nomination paper filed by the petitioner
shall be accepted. The result of the
election held for electing the Adhyaksha,
Zila Panchyat, Rampur, Shall be declared
in accordance with law treating the
petitioner to be a member of backward
class.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$' $8*867
'$7(' $//$+$%$' $8*867

%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21
%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21
%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21
%/( 6. -$,1 -
7+( +21
%/( 6. -$,1 -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

7KH 1DJDU 3DOLND 3DULVKDG
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
6KUL *DQJD 5DP 6R *KXUGL /DO DQG
RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL 9LQRG 0LVUD
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6&

6HFWLRQ G RI WKH &RQVXPHU 3URWHFWLRQ
$FW WKH UHVSRQGHQW ZDV QRW D FRQVXPHU
DV GHILQHG XQGHU VHFWLRQ ' RI WKH
&RQVXPHU 3URWHFWLRQ $FW DQG DV VXFK WKH
DSSHDO
ILOHG
E\
DSSHOODQW
ZDV
QRW
PDLQWDLQDEOH 0RUHRYHU WKH VXSSO\ RI
HOHFWULFLW\ ZKLFK ZDV VQRW ZLWKLQ WKH
FRQWURO RU GRPDLQ RI WKH SHWLWLRQHU DQ
DSSDUHQW MXULVGLFWLRQDO HUURU KDV EHHQ