Kriti Agrawal –
The Supreme Court granted relief to Amravati MP Navneet Kaur Rana by staying the Bombay High Court’s decision to annul her caste certificate.
While serving notice on the special leave plea filed by her against the High Court ruling, a Vacation Bench comprising Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari stopped the ruling of the High Court order.
The MP’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, argued that the terms Mochi and chamaar are interchangeable. He went on to say that the inspection committee had determined her caste status based on the original data that had been presented to them.
Mr Rohatgi claims that records older than 30 years are presumed to be correct. The documents’ authenticity was not questioned.
Mr Mukul further contended that the High Court made an error in its judgement because it made a factual determination in a writ case while ignoring several documents.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who spoke for the petitioners who challenged Rana’s caste certificate in the High Court, stated that the vigilance committee discovered that many documents were forged. He was ordered by the Court to file a counter-affidavit in the case.
Mr Sibal objected vehemently as the Bench was about to issue a stay order. He stated that the stay would not be granted unless he was heard.
At that point, the Bench paused in its dictation of the order to hear Mr Sibal’s contribution, which alluded to the vigilance cell’s findings on document forgery.
The Court questioned whether the High Court could have made such factual findings under the Constitution’s Article 226. The Bench further noted that, if the High Court was unhappy with the conclusions of the scrutiny committee, it should have remanded the case to it for further consideration.
Mr Sibal said that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was the only recourse open against the scrutiny committee.
After hearing contentions, the Bench decided to stay the Bombay High Court’s decision.