Atmaram Jagannath Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 8371 Bom
Judgement Date : 2 November, 2017

Bombay High Court
Atmaram Jagannath Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 2 November, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
                                        1                      W.P.No.12747/17

                                    UNREPORTED

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
                                  AT BOMBAY

                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD.


                           WRIT PETITION NO.12747 OF 2017


          Atmaram Jagannath Patil,
          Age 54 years, Occ.Legal
          Practitioner(Advocate),
          R/o Morgaon, Tq.Raver,
          Dist.Jalgaon.
          At present R/o Plot No.34,
          Govardhan Kunj, N-4, CIDCO,
          Aurangabad, Tq. and Dist.
          Aurangabad.                              ... Petitioner.



                           Versus

          1. The State of Maharashtra
          through Principal Secretary,
          Social Justice Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai--32.

          2. District Level Caste
          Certificate Scrutiny
          Committee, Jalgaon,
          Dist.Jalgaon through
          its Member Secretary.                    ... Respondents.

                                            ...

          Mr.M.S.Deshmukh, advocate for the petitioner.
          Mr.S.W.Munde, A.G.P. for the State.
                                   ...

                                 CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND
                                         SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,JJ.

Date : 02.11.2017.

::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 01:25:00 ::: 2 W.P.No.12747/17 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.)

1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

2. Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel submits that the petitioner is issued with the caste certificate of 'Kunbi' (OBC). The petitioner had submitted proposal seeking verification of his caste claim with the Respondent No.2 Committee, however, the same is not accepted on the ground that it is not submitted through any institution. The learned counsel submits that even if an individual submits the proposal, the Committee has to verify it.

3. We have heard learned A.G.P.

4. Time and again, we have directed the Respondent No.2 Committee to accept the proposal for verification of the caste claim even if the said proposal is submitted by the individual provided that the proposal is in a proper format. ::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 01:25:00 ::: 3 W.P.No.12747/17

5. The Respondent No.2 Committee shall accept the proposal submitted by the petitioner in proper format for verification of his caste claim. Upon submission of the proposal in a proper format for verification of his caste claim by the petitioner, the Respondent No.2 Committee shall decide the same expeditiously, preferably within four (4) months. The petitioner shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the said proceedings.

6. Rule accordingly made absolute in above terms. No costs.

                           Sd/-                                 Sd/-

          (SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,J.)               (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)



          asp/office/wp12747.17




::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017                           ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 01:25:00 :::
                                4                W.P.No.12747/17




::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017       ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 01:25:00 :::