Wednesday, 22, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Hemantkumar Narayan Bali, Non ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ...
2003 Latest Caselaw 951 Bom

Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 951 Bom
Judgement Date : 20 August, 2003

Bombay High Court
Hemantkumar Narayan Bali, Non ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 20 August, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004 (1) BomCR 582
Author: C Thakker
Bench: C Thakker, D Chandrachud

JUDGMENT

C.K. Thakker, C.J.

1. Rule. Mr. R.D. Rane, learned Additional Government Pleaders, appears and waives services of notice of rule on behalf of the first respondent. Mr. S.S. Pakale, learned counsel, appears and waives services of notice of rule on behalf of respondents NO. 2 and 3.

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

3. This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside an order dated December 31, 2002 passed by respondent No. 2 to terminate the services of the petitioner after a period of one month from that date.

4. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Mahadeo Koli, and a certificate to that effect was issued by the Sub Divisional Officer on February 18, 1998. On the basis of the said certificate, and after holding necessary inquiry, the petitioner was appointed as Non Medical Officer in the Office of the district Health Officer, Raigad Zilla Parishad, at Alibag, respondent No. 3 herein, by an order dated February 27, 1999. The Caste Certificate of the petitioner was then referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification, and the Committee, by an order dated November 8, 2001, invalidated the certificate of the petitioner, relying on school record of the father and uncle of the petitioner. The said order is annexed at Exhibit 'B'. Since the Committee invalidated his certificate, the petitioner immediately moved the Sub Divisional officer, Alibag, for grant of the Caste Certificate as belonging to Koli Caste, which was recognised as Special Backward Class Category vide Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995, and such certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer, Alibag, on March 21, 2002. The petitioner, on the basis of the said certificate, requested respondents No. 2 and 3 to extend the benefit of Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995 in his favour. Respondent No. 2, however, without application of mind, and without issuing any show-cause notice, straightaway issued Memorandum dated December 31, 2002, terminating the services of the petitioner after one month from that date. The petitioner was, therefore, constrained to approach this Court.

5. The main contention of the petitioner in the present petition is that even if it is held by the Committee vide its order dated March 21, 2002 that the petitioner did not belong to Mahadeo Koli, and the certificate issued in his favour was liable to be cancelled and confiscated, he should be protected in accordance with the policy-decision of the Government vide Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995. The petitioner, accordingly, requested the Sub Divisional Officer to issue necessary certificate that he belongs to Koli Caste, which is recognised as Special Backward Class Category, and the said certificate has already been issued in his favour by the Sub Divisional Officer, It was, therefore, obligatory on respondents No. 2 and 3 to protect services of the petitioner on the basis of Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995. Since it was not done and the action was taken without issuing show-cause notice, without affording opportunity of hearing and in contravention of the Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995, he had to approach this Court.

6. An affidavit-in-reply is filed by the Deputy Secretary to Government, General Administration Department, wherein it was stated that in view of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the certificate issued in favour of the petitioner as belonging to Mahadeo Koli, he cannot seek protection of the Government Resolution dated June 15, 1995. In this connection, it was the say of the deponent that such benefit could be granted only if a person has secured certificate on or before June 15, 1995. In the instant case, the petitioner was appointed in February, 1999, and, hence, he could not get protection of the said Resolution.

7. In our opinion, the petitioner cannot claim protection under the above Resolution. A similar question came up for consideration in the other matter, which we have decided today, i.e., Writ Petition No. 947 of 2003, wherein we had observed that in the light of the decision in Kum. Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development and Ors., , and decisions of this Court (Nagpur Bench) in Vandana D/o. Narayan Sonkusare v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (1998) 2 MhLJ 12, and Mohan Parasnath Goswami v. Committee for Scrutiny of Caste Certificates and Ors., , such claim cannot be upheld. Hence, the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted, and is hereby rejected.

8. Reliance on the decisions of this Court in Chandrabhan Nandanwar v. Deputy Director of Health Services, (1999) 1 MhLJ 536, and Anil Vasant Shirpurkar v. Kalyan Dombivil Municipal Corporation, Writ Petition No. 3701 of 2002, decided on July 12, 2002, also cannot carry the matter further. Apart from the fact that for the reasons stated in the earlier part of the judgment, upholding of such contention would make the provisions of conferring benefits on Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes nugatory, even otherwise, it would amount to fraud on the Constitution. Moreover, there was no unreasonable delay in taking action against the petitioner.

9. For the foregoing reasons, in our opinion, there is no substance in the petition. The petition deserves to be dismissed, and is accordingly dismissed Rule is discharged. Ad-interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. In the facts and circumstances, however, there shall be no order as to costs.

10. 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.

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter