Bombay High Court
Shri.Chandrakiran Baburao ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And 2 Ors on 28 August, 2015
Bench: Anoop V. Mohta
ssm 1 907-wp1343.15.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1343 OF 2015
Shri Chandrakiran Baburao Sakpal,
Age 56 years, Occu. Service,
R/at. 4, Officers Quarters,
Bhandarwala Hill, Water Reserviour,
Joseph Baptista Garden,
Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 003. ....Petitioner.
Vs.
1 The State of Maharashtra
Through Government Pleader,
High Court, Bombay.
2 The Commissioner,
Brihanmumbai Municipal
Corporation (Legal Department),
Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg,
Mumbai-01.
3 Shri Dattatraya Harishchandra Patil,
Alias Dattatraya Harishchandra Pimpale,
Age 55 yrs., Occu. Service,
R/at. N.L. Complex, 1st floor,
"C" Wing, Dahisar (East),
Mumbai-68. ....Respondents.
Mr. Mahesh Rawool i/by R.R. Dhuru for the Petitioner.
Mr. B.V. Bukhari, senior advocate a/w Surekha Sonawane for BMC.
Ms. Anjali Helekar, AGP a/w D.A. Nalawade, GP for State.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND
A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE : 28 AUGUST 2015.
ssm 2 907-wp1343.15.sxw
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER ANOOP V. MOHTA, J):-
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
Heard finally, by consent of the parties.
2 The Petitioner, as stated to be aggrieved by inaction on the
part of Respondent No.2- the Commissioner, Brihanmumbai Municipal
Corporation, (for short,"the BMC") in not deciding the representation
filed by the Petitioner to verify the caste certificate submitted by
Respondent No.3 while seeking employment in question. The
Petitioner's prayers are as under:-
"(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent
No.2 to forthwith enquire into the validity of the
caste of the respondent No.3 and forthwith withdraw
the benefits of employment, promotion and salary
obtained by the respondent No.3 if the caste
certificate submitted by the Respondent No.3 is found
to be false and fabricated.
(c) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the
Respondent No.2 to refer the caste certificate
submitted by the Respondent No.3 to the appropriate
Caste Scrutiny Committee for its validity.
(d) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent
No.2 to initiate appropriate civil, criminal and/or
disciplinary proceedings against the respondent No.3
for fraudulently seeking employment and
consequential benefits."
ssm 3 907-wp1343.15.sxw
3 The Petitioner and Respondent No.3 are working with the
BMC and at present holding same rank- Deputy Chief Security Officer.
The complaints/representations so filed by the Petitioner have been
decided earlier by Respondent No.2 by reasoned orders by noting that
this Court in Writ Petition filed by Respondent No.3, after considering
the related issues, including the issue revolving around the caste
certificate, passed order in favour of Respondent No.3-Dattatraya
Harishchandra Patil, in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), which
read as follows:-
"(a) .....the Respondent No.2 abovenamed and examining
the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned
order dated 02.1.1986 passed by the second
Respondent, Exhibit "H" to the Petition, quash and set
aside the same.
(b) .....direct the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith
revoke, cancel and rescind the impugned order dated
02.01.1986 Exhibit "H" to the petition and permit
the Petitioner to avail of the permission opportunities
and further continue him in service as before and
declare that the Caste Certificate issued to him is
valid and subsisting."
4 Admittedly, Special Leave Petition filed against the order
passed by this Court, was also dismissed by the Supreme Court. That
ssm 4 907-wp1343.15.sxw
resulted into attaining the finality so far as the order of this Court, as
well as, the issue revolving around the caste certificate in question
and its validity. All are bound by the Judgment and order passed in
the matter.
5 Therefore, we see no case is made out by the Petitioner for
the reliefs so prayed, including to re-open the caste issue of
Respondent No.3. There is no justification and/or case is made out to
exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, in view of above admitted position.
6 The submission revolving around the documents which are
part of this Writ Petition, which were also part of earlier orders passed
by the Courts. There is no change of circumstances revolving around
the same caste certificates, no case is made out to direct Respondent
No.2-BMC to pass order on the representations/complaints so filed by
the Petitioner as prayed.
7 However, we are inclined to observe that, if it is a case of
fraud and/or misrepresentation of any sort, the Petitioner is at liberty
ssm 5 907-wp1343.15.sxw
to invoke appropriate remedy, in accordance with law.
8 Writ Petition is dismissed.
9 Rule is discharged accordingly.
10 There shall be no order as to costs.
(A.A. SAYED, J.)
ig (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
ssm 6 907-wp1343.15.sxw
CERTIFICATE
"I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order."
Uploaded by :- Sanjiv S. Mashalkar,
Private Secretary, to Hon'ble Judge.
Uploaded on :- 1 September 2015.
