Sangeet Lodha, J. - (1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard at this stage. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality of order dt. 30.12.14 passed by the Nayab Tehsildar, Jalore whereby the OBC Certificate issued in favour of the petitioner stands cancelled.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that the certificate issued in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled by the Nayab Tehsildar by passing a cryptic order without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner which is violative of principles of natural Justice. In support of the contention, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rampal v. State of Haryana and Ors., : (2009) 9 SCC 187. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner does not belong to the caste "Rajput Parmar" and therefore, she was not entitled to be issued the certificate of OBC category. Learned counsel submitted that the rectification of the order is always permissible and therefore, the order passed by the Nayab Tehsildar, Jalore cannot be faulted with. However, it is not disputed by the learned counsel that the order impugned has been passed by the authority concerned without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(3.) I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.;