wp5555.16.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5555/2016
PETITIONER: Jyoti Manohar Dode
Aged 42 years, Occu. Service,
R/o Amarnath, District Thane.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, through its
Member Secretary, Bhatkuli Road,
Amravati.
2. Principal, Shri R.K. Abhang Madhyamik
Vidyalaya, Ulhas Nagar - 421 004
Distt. Thane
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.D. Khati, Advocate for petitioner
Mrs. G.R. Tiwari, AGP for respondent no.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, AND
MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 08.12.2016 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the Scrutiny Committee, dated 23.5.2016, invalidating the claim of the petitioner of belonging to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe.
::: Uploaded on - 14/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2016 00:21:55 :::wp5555.16.odt 2 The petitioner was appointed as a Shikshan Sevak on a post earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes on 1.10.2003. The caste claim of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by the order, dated 23.5.2016. The petitioner has impugned the said order in the instant case.
Shri Khati, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that though the petitioner received the notice, dated 20.12.2014, calling the petitioner for hearing, the petitioner failed to remain present before the Committee and submit her explanation. It is stated that the petitioner was working as a school teacher and she did not understand the repercussions of not remaining present before the Scrutiny Committee after the show-
cause-notice was served on her. It is stated that the petitioner possesses some relevant material, which she could have pointed out before the Scrutiny Committee but she failed to remain present before the Scrutiny Committee and bring the same to the notice of the Committee. It is stated that this Court may take a lenient and sympathetic view in the matter and remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee as the petitioner would lose her job on the basis of the order of the Scrutiny Committee. It is stated that one opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner as the petitioner has already paid the costs of Rs.5,000/-, as directed by this ::: Uploaded on - 14/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2016 00:21:55 ::: wp5555.16.odt 3 Court.
Mrs. Tiwari, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Scrutiny Committee states that the Scrutiny Committee has rightly rejected the caste claim of the petitioner. It is stated that despite the service of the notice on the petitioner, the petitioner failed to remain present and submit her explanation to the Vigilance Report and the queries made by the Committee. It is stated that in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order may not be set aside.
In the circumstances of the case, we find that one last opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner by considering this petition to be a mercy petition. The petitioner is working as an Assistant Teacher since her appointment as a Shikshan Sevak in the year 2003 and since the petitioner claims that she could have properly explained the show-cause-notice, an opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner as she would lose her job on the basis of the order of the Scrutiny Committee. Since the petitioner has stated that she was not able to attend the hearing before the Scrutiny Committee due to her busy schedule, it would be necessary to direct the Scrutiny Committee to grant one last opportunity to the petitioner to submit her explanation and give her say on the show-cause-notice, more so, when the petitioner has paid the costs of Rs.5,000/- as per our directions, due to her mistake. In the peculiar ::: Uploaded on - 14/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2016 00:21:55 ::: wp5555.16.odt 4 facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to take a lenient view in the matter and remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for a fresh decision on merits after granting an opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the hearing.
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Scrutiny Committee for a fresh decision on merits, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 09.01.2017 so that the issuance of notice to the petitioner could be dispensed with.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
::: Uploaded on - 14/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2016 00:21:55 :::