Bombay High Court
Shri. Venanand S/O Raghobaji ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr ... on 25 April, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp1530.16.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1530/2016
PETITIONER: Shri Venanand s/o Raghobaji Dewase
Age : 45 years, Occu. : Service R/o Flat No.102,
Nilayam Apartment Jai Vihar Colony Takli (Sim)
Hingana T point, Nagpur.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1. The State of Maharashtra through its
Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Nagpur.
3. Administrative Officer, Commissioner of
Police, Nagpur.
4. Dept. Commissioner of Police
Motor Vehicle Department, Nagpada, Mumbai.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri D.R. Rupnarayan, Advocate for petitioner
Shri N.R. Patil, AGP for respondents
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, AND
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 25.04.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard
finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of
the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 20.11.2015 dismissing
the original application filed by the petitioner after holding that the
wp1530.16.odt
respondents were justified in directing the recovery of the amount that
was paid to the petitioner on his promotion to the post of Assistant Stock
Inspector - Driver.
The petitioner was appointed as a Police Constable on
15.4.1995 on a post earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes. In 1999, the
petitioner was promoted as a Police Constable - Driver and he was further
promoted to the post of Assistant Stock Inspector-Driver in 2003. The
caste claim of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for
verification. On 5.1.2009, the Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste
claim of the petitioner. After the invalidation of his caste claim, the
petitioner was reverted to the post of Police Constable vide order, dated
31.5.2010. The petitioner had no objection for his reversion to the post of
Police Constable, but he was aggrieved by the recovery of the amount
towards difference of salary. According to the petitioner, the petitioner
had received the salary of an Assistant Stock Inspector - Driver in
pursuance of his promotion and the amount paid to the petitioner could
not have been recovered after his reversion.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the original application filed by
the petitioner. It is stated that though the petitioner was rightly reverted
to the post of Police Constable after the invalidation of his tribe claim, the
wp1530.16.odt
respondents were not justified in seeking the recovery of the amount paid
to the petitioner for his services as an Assistant Stock Inspector - Driver. It
is submitted that the pay of the petitioner needs to be protected as there is
no observation in the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner
had fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Scheduled Tribes. It is
stated that since the petitioner had actually worked on the post of Police
Constable - Driver and Assistant Stock Inspector - Driver, the salary paid
to the petitioner for having worked on those posts, ought not have been
recovered.
The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondents supported the order of the Tribunal. It is, however, fairly
admitted that there is nothing in the order of the Scrutiny Committee to
show that the petitioner had fabricated the documents for seeking the
benefits meant for the Scheduled Tribes. It is stated that since the caste
claim of the petitioner was invalidated, the respondents rightly sought the
recovery of the amount that was paid to the petitioner for having worked
on the promotional post.
On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that
the Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the original application filed
by the petitioner, in the circumstances of the case. The petitioner had
claimed to belong to Scheduled Tribes and though the caste claim of the
wp1530.16.odt
petitioner was invalidated, the Scrutiny Committee did not find that the
petitioner had played fraud either on the Committee or on his employer
while seeking the benefits meant for the Scheduled Tribes. There is no
observation in the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner has
fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Scheduled Tribes. The
petitioner had actually worked on the promotional post of Police
Constable - Driver and the Assistant Stock Inspector - Driver for long and
the salary paid to the petitioner for having worked on those posts could
not have been recovered after his reversion, more so, when there was
nothing in the order of the Scrutiny Committee to show that the petitioner
had practiced fraud for seeking the benefits meant for the Scheduled
Tribes.
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is
allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The original
application filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order of recovery is
hereby quashed and set aside. If the amount is already recovered from the
petitioner, in pursuance of the order of recovery, the respondents are
liable to repay the same to the petitioner at the earliest.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
