Prabhakar Dattatraya Telgu vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ...
2003 Latest Caselaw 945 Bom

JUDGMENT

C.K. Thakker, C.J.

1. Rule. Mr.C.R. Sonawane, learned Assistant Government Pleader, appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. G.S.Hegde, learned counsel, appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No.3.

2. In the facts and circumstances, and with the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

3. This petition is filed by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside an order dated September 15, 2001 passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Pune respondent No.2 herein, and by directing Deputy General Manager, State Transport Corporation, Pune, respondent No.4 herein, to withdraw and/or cancel an order of termination dated 24th September, 2002 by reinstating the petitioner on the post of Head Art with all consequential benefits including back wages.

4. Notice was issued on December 3, 2002 and was made returnable in the third week of January, 2003. Interim relief was also granted.

5. The case of the petitioner is that in 1973, he was appointed as Helper by Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, respondent No.3 herein. The petitioner was granted certificate by Executive Magistrate, Pune City, Pune, respondent No.5 herein in 1997. The petitioner was then promoted to the post of Art "C" in 1986. In 1991, he was further promoted to the post of Art "A" and then in 1995 as Head Art. In January, 2001, the caste certificate of the petitioner was referred by respondent No.4 to respondent No.2. Thus, the said action was taken after more than twenty years. By the impugned order dated 15th September, 2001. respondent No.2 invalidated the certificate of the petitioner. The said order is challenged by the petitioner in the present petition.

6. On September 24, 2002, a consequential order came to be passed by respondent No.4 terminating the services of the petitioner, the legality of which is questioned by the petitioner in this petition.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

8. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the certificate issued by respondent No.5 in favour of the petitioner was legal, valid and in accordance with law. It was issued as early as in 1977. It was, therefore, not open to respondent No.4 to refer the matter for validity of the certificate issued in 1997 by scrutinising such certificate by respondent No.2 Committee in 2001 i.e. after more than two decades. Such an action was clearly arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed in Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It was also submitted that in the order of appointment, nowhere it was mentioned that the petitioner was required to furnish such certificate and on that ground also, no action could have been taken by the respondents. Reliance and placed on decisions of this Court in Chandrabhan Yamaji Nandanwar v. Director of Health Services, Maharashtra State, Bombay and Ord., (1999) 1 Mh LJ 536 and Anil Vasantrao Shirpurkar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2002) 4 Mh LJ 365. Reference was also made to a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3994 of 2002 decided on 13th August, 2002, Prakash Pralhad Ingale v. Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation & Anr.

9. An affidavit in reply is filed by Research Officer, Tribal Research and Training Institute of Maharashtra State. Pune. In the counter, it was stated that the claim of the petitioner had been referred by the Deputy General manager, State Transport, Dapodi, Pune, vide his letter dated 15th January, 2002. The petitioner had produced five documents before the Scrutiny Committee in support of the claim. All those documents were handed over to Vigilance Cell for Home and School Enquiry, Vigilance Cell conducted the inquiry and submitted a report with documentary evidence and statements of relatives of the petitioner recorded during the course of inquiry. The inquiry report was then forwarded to the petitioner for obtaining his say in the matter. The petitioner had given his explanation on the inquiry report and accepted the facts stated therein. The Committee noted that there was alteration and modification which was in different ink in the caste column so as to benefit the petitioner. By such alteration and modification, the petitioner was shown to be belonging to S.T. It was also observed by the Committee that the Inspector of Vigilance Cell had obtained an extract of School General Register from the School where the candidate's cousin uncle took education and whose caste was recorded as Telgu. The said document pertained to the year 1945. The service book of the petitioner's father was also checked and it was found that the caste of the father of the petitioner was recorded as Telgu. Those documents were prior to the issue of first Presidential Order of 1950 notifying Scheduled Tribes. According to the Committee, probative value of those documents was higher and could be taken into account by the Committee. When the caste of the father of the petitioner was Telgu, obviously petitioner could not claim the benefit as Mahadeo-Koli, S.T. as asserted by him. The Committee also noted that the caste is always acquired by birth and hence the record of the candidate could be treated as "manipulated record".

10. To comply with the principles of natural justice, the inquiry report and documents had also been forwarded to the petitioner and he was asked to comment upon the same. He was also given opportunity to furnish his explanation on the inquiry report and was asked to remain personally present at the time of hearing. The candidate accordingly remained present at the time of personal hearing. At the time of hearing, the petitioner mainly relied upon the xerox copy of the extract of the School General Register issued by Kendra Pramukh, Pune, wherein he was shown as Mahadeo-Koli. The said document pertains to 1961. He also submitted caste certificate issued by Tahsildar and Executive Magistrate, Pune City, Puen, wherein he was shown as Hindu-Mahadeo Koli.

11. In our opinion, however, the respondents are right in taking the view that caste certificate is always subject to scrutiny and the certificate produced by the petitioner cannot be said to be conclusive. We are also of the view that the Committee was right in observing that since the caste of the petitioner's father and cousin brother was recorded as telgu in their respective record, it was not understood how Executive Magistrate had issued a caste certificate to the petitioner as belonged to Mahadeo-Koli, S.T. The Scrutiny Committee was, therefore, right in observing that the Competent Authority had not followed the instructions issued by the Government of India as well as State Government from time to time while issuing such certificates.

12. Moreover, the Scrutiny Committee had verified the Tribe Claim of the petitioner with reference to traits, characteristics, customs and on the basis of that exercise also, a finding was recorded by the Committee that the petitioner did not belong to Mahadeo- Koli, and hence the certificate was invalidated. The Scrutiny Committee, however, observed that the case of the petitioner should be considered on the basis of the instructions issued by Government vide Resolution dated 15th June, 1995 of the candidate.

13. In the affidavit in reply, the deponent has stated that from the entire record, it was clear that the petitioner had got benefit of reservation "by fraudulent means". He also observed that nobody should be allowed to get concessions meant for S.C. S.T. and other Backward Classes once the caste certificate is invalidated by the Competent Authority. The petitioner, therefore, cannot claim any benefit on the basis of such certificate.

14. Moreover, with a view to curb the practice of obtaining employment by getting fake or false certificate and by depriving eligible and qualified persons from getting appointment in public services, the State of Maharashtra has enacted an Act known as Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001( (the act for short). We had an occasion to consider the provisions of the Act in Mohan Parasnath Goswami v. Committee for Scrutiny of Caste Certificates and Ors. . We held in that case that on the basis of the report of the Scrutiny Committee and the order passed, appropriate actions can always be taken by the authorities. We have however, held that for taking such actions in accordance with law, the provisions of the Act have to be followed. If a person has produced such a certificate and obtained an advantage, it is open to the authorities to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

15. For the foregoing reasons, the petition deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Since the petitioner is already out of employment, no further order is necessary, Rule is ordered to be discharged. No order as to costs.

Parties be given copies of this order duly authenticated by the Associate/Sheristedar/Private Secretary.

The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that ad-interim relief granted earlier, which continues till today, may be continued for some more time so as to enable the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court. In our opinion, prayer is reasonable. Ad-interim relief will be continued for four weeks from today.