J&K High Court Halts EWS Certificate Cancellation, Citing Due Process Violations
Last Updated on January 2, 2025 by Amit Patra
In a significant ruling that underlines the importance of procedural fairness, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has stayed the cancellation of an Economically Weaker Section (EWS) certificate, pointing out grave concerns of administrative bias and violation of principles of natural justice.
The case has arisen on an appeal by Ajay Kumar Sareen against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu, canceling his EWS certificate, allegedly issued on concealment of the property details of his father. The cancellation followed a complaint which resulted in an inquiry by the Tehsildar Nazool, Jammu.
At the heart of the controversy is the approach to the investigation by the Deputy Commissioner. The Court found particularly disturbing that the officer commenced the proceedings with a presumption of guilt, proclaiming the petitioner guilty of fraud and misrepresentation even before a proper inquiry had been made. This preconceived notion, the Court noted, tainted the whole proceeding.
What was more concerning, however, was the complete disregard of the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner had neither been informed of the inquiry nor afforded any facility to rebut the adverse findings against him. The Deputy Commissioner’s reliance upon the ex-parte inquiry report and the resultant refusal to accord the Petitioner an opportunity of defending himself was a frontal attack on procedural fairness.
The case also brought to light important legal nuances regarding the J&K Reservation Act, 2004. A very important question of law that arose was whether new evidence could be appreciated in revision proceedings when the petitioner thus contended that the validity of the inquiry report was part of the decision-making process.
Such intervention by the High Court is a reminder that administrative decisions—especially those that go to affect the rights of citizens—can only be done in adherence to due process. The cancellation order being stayed and original records demanded, the Court has insisted that even in cases of fraud, authorities must follow established legal procedures and principles of natural justice.
This decision has significant implications for administrative law practice, particularly in certification and welfare benefits cases. It confirms that no matter how serious the allegations, authorities cannot circumvent procedural protections or act on pre-formed conclusions.
