M.N.Bhandari, J. - (1.) THESE four writ petitions have been heard together and are decided by common judgment as the facts and controversies are not only related to one person but are inter -linked. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: The petitioner was elected as Chairperson of Municipal Council, Alwar. The election of the petitioner was challenged by maintaining election petition by a defeated candidate, Sweta Saini. The election petition is still pending before the Additional District Judge No. 1, Alwar. One of the ground taken in the election petition is that petitioner does not belong to OBC though the post was reserved for that category. It is alleged by the petitioner that due to political influence of the opponent party, caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled on 29th January, 2010 by the Tehsildar. The petitioner challenged the order of Tehsildar. The writ petition preferred by the petitioner was disposed of with the directions for constitution of committee as per judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors., reported in : AIR 1995 SC 94 to verify the caste of the petitioner and the order passed by the Tehsildar was set aside by the Court as he was not competent to pass the order.
(2.) THE respondents constituted a State Level Scrutiny Committee (in short "Committee") consists of three members, which according to the petitioner, was contrary to the subsequent directions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the same case of Kumari Madhuri Patil reported in : (1997) 5 SCC 437. Therein, the direction was given to constitute the committee of five members. It is also stated that the committee did not consider the objections about its constitution and proceeded without holding proper meetings. The petitioner then preferred writ petition No. 1110/2013 and one of the petition out of the four cases was decided in the meantime. In the meanwhile, the committee passed order on 14.03.2013 wherein the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled holding that she is not belonging to OBC. The petitioner thereafter challenged the order dated 14.03.2013 by maintaining a Writ Petition No. 5233/2013. During pendency of the second writ petition, the respondents passed another order on 09.04.2013 declaring election of the petitioner to be illegal and removed her from the post of Chairperson. The petitioner filed third writ petition bearing No. 6011/2013. The respondents thereafter passed another order on 06.05.2013 to supersede the earlier order of removal and substituted it by suspension. The petitioner filed fourth writ petition to challenge the order of suspension. In the meanwhile, Writ Petition No. 5233/2013 was disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to make a representation to the committee again. The petitioner then preferred SLP before Hon'ble Apex Court which was thereafter disposed of with the request to the High Court to decide all the four writ petitions and accordingly judgment dated 25.05.2013 was set aside with remand of the case. In view of the above, four writ petitions have been heard together and are decided by this common judgment.
(3.) THE petitioner, in person, has challenged, the constitution of the committee in the first writ petition mainly on the ground that constitution of the committee is not as per the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) directed for constitution of five members committee instead of three members as was earlier directed in the said case (in the year 1995). In the second writ petition, the order of the committee has been challenged where caste certificate has been cancelled. It is alleged that the committee passed order without sending the matter to the Vigilance Committee and causing inquiry as directed by Hon'ble Apex Court. The committee superficially passed the order by calling the report from the Collector without causing inquiry by themselves. The Collector submitted the report which was nothing but literally the same as was given earlier by the Tehsildar to cancel the caste certificate. The report of the committee so as the order are nothing but an empty formality to endorse the same view and the finding as was recorded by the Tehsildar in an illegal manner and had been set aside by the Court. It is also stated that the committee members had not attended the meeting with the coram and otherwise notices for hearing were given in such a manner that they were received by the petitioner after appointed date thus fair and proper opportunity of hearing was not given.;