High Courts Should Not Ordinarily Interfere With Scrutiny Committee's Findings On Caste Claims Unless Findings Are Perverse : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today, in a crucial judgment pronounced by it, opined that in cases where the scrutiny committee has decided the validation of the caste claim, the Courts should refrain from interfering unless the committee's decision suffers from any perversity. “Once the Scrutiny Committee after hearing the contesting parties and evaluating the documents on record reached on conclusion based on its satisfaction and application of mind, the question that arises for consideration of this Court in the particular facts of this case is that how far the High Court was justified in completely overturning the findings of Scrutiny Committee in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by reappraisal of the entire evidence on record?.,” the Court asked. In this precedent, the Court had clearly observed that a Scrutiny Committee is not an adjudicating authority like a Court or Tribunal rather, it is an administrative body that verifies the fact, investigates a specific caste claim, and ascertains whether the caste claim is correct, or not It may be noted that the High Court had invoked the writ of certiorari to quash the committee's decision. “The High Court ought not to have interfered, especially when Scrutiny Committee had followed the due procedure under Rule 12, 17 and 18 of the 2012 Rules and that there was nothing perverse about a finding of fact.,” "If the findings of the Scrutiny Committee are based on the materials specified under Rule 16 followed by its subjective satisfaction, then exercise of jurisdiction under writ of certiorari to quash the order of validation of caste claim by Scrutiny Committee is unwarranted and uncalled for," the judgment concluded while setting aside the impugned judgment of the High Court.