Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rashmi Haresh Tawari vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 1442 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 1442 Bom
Judgement Date : 12 April, 2016

Bombay High Court
Rashmi Haresh Tawari vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 12 April, 2016
Bench: Anoop V. Mohta
    dgm                                              1                     21-wp-4641-14.sxw


                IN THE  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                      
                              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                              
                            WRIT PETITION NO. 4641   OF 2014

    Rashmi Haresh Tawari,
    Aged 40 years, residing at,




                                                             
    Gangasangam Co-op. Housing
    Society, A/13, 2nd Floor, Varse,
    Tal. Roha, Dist. Raigad - 402 116         ....   Petitioner
          vs




                                                
    1     State of Maharashtra, through
          its Secretary, Social Welfare Department,
                                   
          Mantralaya, Mumbai 400032

    2      Directorate of Ayurved, Maharashtra
                                  
           State, Govt. Dental College and
           Hospital Building, 4th floor, St. Georges
           Hospital Compound, P. D'mello Rd,
           Fort, Mumbai 400 001
          


    4      Dean,
       



           M. A. Poddar Hospital, 
           Worli, Mumbai                                 ....    Respondents





    Mr. R.K. Mendadkar with Mr. C.K. Bhangoji for the petitioner.
    Mr. C. P. Yadav, AGP for respondents 1 and 2. 

                                     CORAM:    ANOOP V. MOHTA AND 





                                               A. A. SAYED,  JJ. 
                                      DATE  :    April 12,  2016 

    ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Anoop V. Mohta, J.):

                    Rule,   returnable   forthwith.     Heard   finally   by   consent   of 







     dgm                                            2                    21-wp-4641-14.sxw


    parties. 




                                                                                   
                                                           
    2               On 20 September 1997, the Petitioner was appointed by 

Respondent No.2 and posted at the office of Respondent No.3 on the

post of Nurse under reserved category of Scheduled Tribe. Since the

Petitioner was appointed from the reserved category, Respondent No.3

referred the caste certificate of the Petitioner to the Scheduled Tribe

Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Thane for verification. The Scrutiny

Committee, however, has invalidated the caste certificate of the

Petitioner as belonging to Mahadev Koli, Scheduled Tribe on 13 June

2012. On 20 July, 2012, in view of the invalidation of tribe claim as

belonging to Scheduled Tribe, Respondent No.3 passed an order

thereby terminating the services of the Petitioner on the post of Nurse.

3 The Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner against the order

of the Scrutiny Committee was disposed of by this Court directing the

Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny No.3, Belapur, Navi Mumbai to

decide caste claim of the Petitioner as belonging to Koli, Special

Backward Class (SBC) as the Petitioner gave up her caste claim as

belonging to Koli Mahadeo (Scheduled Tribe). On 25 March 2014,

dgm 3 21-wp-4641-14.sxw

thereafter, as per directions given by this Court, the Divisional Caste

Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1, Konkan Bhavan, Navi Mumbai

validated the caste certificate of the Petitioner as belonging to Koli,

SBC and accordingly issued caste validity certificate.

4 The learned AGP resisted the case of the Petitioner and

referred to affidavit dated 11.07.2014 and Circulars annexed to it.

5 The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has relied

upon the judgment of Supreme Court in Kavita Solunke v. State of

Maharashtra and ors.1 and a Full Bench judgment of this Court in

Arun s/o Vishwanath Sonone v. State of Maharashtra & ors 2 and

basically referred to paragraph 62 which is reproduced as under :

"62 We, therefore, find that the decision of the

Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pradip

Koli to the extent it holds in para 26 that "the case

of A.P. Ramtekar does not notice that the decision

in the case of Kavita Solunke is confined to those

who were claiming to be Halbas and therefore, it is 1 2012 (5) Mh. L. J. 921 2 2015 (1) ALL MR 799 (F.B.)

dgm 4 21-wp-4641-14.sxw

not a binding principle" does not lay down a

correct legal position and hence it is partly

overruled, making it further clear that we concur

with rest of the judgment as laying down a correct

position of law in respect of "Koshti" and "Halba

Koshti". Similarly, in Rakesh Dafade's case, the

Division Bench has granted protection to the

persons belonging to "Koli" caste falling in the

Special Backward Class category. We do not find

that the grant of such protection is contrary to any

of the decisions of the Apex Court."

6 Further submission is also made for the reliefs in view of

the judgment passed by this Court in Rakesh Sukanuji Dafade v. State

of Maharashtra and anr.3 and judgment dated 1.9.2015 (Anoop V.

Mohta and A.A. Sayed, JJ.) in Writ Petition No. 4903/2012-Shri

Navnath Shivram Koli v. The General Manager, Central Bank of India

Mumbai and ors4. In Rakesh Dafade (supra), this Division Bench,

3 2014 (3) Mh. L. J. 307 4 Judgment dated 1.9.2015 (Anoop V. Mohta and A.A. Sayed, JJ.) in Writ Petition No. 4903/2012

dgm 5 21-wp-4641-14.sxw

in a similar situation, where the respective Petitioners were

terminated, joined the services by claiming Mahadeo Koli as their

caste which was not validated by the Scrutiny Committee. However, it

was declared that they belong to Koli (Special Backward Class) (SBC).

This Court, based upon the earlier judgments, including the Supreme

Court Judgment so referred above, read with the Full Bench

judgment, granted protection of service and reinstatement with

continuity of service without back wages.

7 In the present case, as noted above, lastly the Petitioner

got validation of her caste certificate being belonging to Koli SBC,

though she was appointed based upon the caste certificate being

belonging to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner,

therefore, in the present Petition, in view of the above judgments, is

seeking similar relief as granted by this Court referring to the Full

Bench judgment in question.

8 Considering the submission so made and the judgments so

referred above, and in view of the fact that the Petitioner was in

service with Respondent No.3 since 20 September 1997 and was

dgm 6 21-wp-4641-14.sxw

terminated on 20 July 2012 after the Caste Scrutiny Committee

invalidated her caste certificate and now the Caste Scrutiny

Committee declared her caste as Koli (SBC), therefore, in the

interest of justice and in view of the judgments and orders so referred

above, we are inclined to grant similar reliefs in the following terms :

ORDER

(a) Termination order dated 20.07.2012 passed by

Respondent No.3 is quashed and set aside.

(b) The Petitioner is entitled for continuity of service

except back wages.

(c ) The Petitioner would not be entitled to any further

caste benefits in future on the basis of which she

was appointed.

(d) It is clarified that in respect of the benefits , if any,

granted after 28.11.2000 being belonging to

Mahadeo Koli (Scheduled Tribe), the

Respondent/employer /management are at liberty

to take appropriate steps and/or to restore the

position as on 28.11.2000 except arrears of salary.

(e) The Petitioner to submit the present/existing caste

dgm 7 21-wp-4641-14.sxw

certificate of Koli (Special Backward Class) to

complete the formality of service record as early as

possible.

(f) Rule is made absolute accordingly in the above

terms.

(g) No costs.




                                               
           (A. A. SAYED, J.)
                                    ig                  (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
                                  
       
    











 

 
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 : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter