AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 173 wordsArindam Sinha, J
Mr. Baisakh, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners. He submits, his clients are brothers, who had applied for caste certificates, online. Information were made available that the application stood closed as they had not submitted paternal RoR. He submits, annexure-5 is extract from the RoR. There be direction upon the authority to consider this document in support of his clients’ application for issuance of caste certificates.
Mr. Nanda, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State. In fairness he submits, the omission can now been filled up by disclosure of annexure-5.
Tahsildar, Sadar, Cuttack is directed to reopen petitioners’ application for issuance of caste certificates and consider the same in light of extract from RoR as in annexure-5. Petitioners will communicate this order along with extract of the RoR, being annexure-5 herein, to the Tahsildar. The office will, within four weeks of communication, either issue the certificates or inform petitioners reasons for rejection of their application.
The writ petition is disposed of.
…………………………..