Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 1846 Bom
Judgement Date : 26 April, 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Writ Petition No. 2160 of 2016
Petitioner : Shatreughna Rambhau Zalte, aged about
44 years, Occupation : nil, resident of
Patonda, Tahsil Nandura, Dist. Buldana
igversus
Respondents : 1) Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad,
Buldhana
2) Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati,
through its Chairman
Shri M. V. Bute, Advocate for petitioner
Shri S. M. Ukey, Advocate for respondent no. 1
Shri A. K. Bangadkar, Asst. Government Pleader for respondent no. 2
Coram : Smt Vasanti A. Naik And
V. M. Deshpande, JJ
Dated : 26th April 2016
Oral Judgment (Per Smt Vasanti A. Naik, J)
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is
heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned
counsel for the parties.
2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the
respondent-Zilla Parishad to reinstate the petitioner in service and protect his
services in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Arun
v. State of Maharashtra and ors reported in 2015 (1) Mh. L. J. 457.
The petitioner was appointed as a Primary Teacher on 30 th
June 1995 in a school run by the respondent no. 1-Zilla Parishad, on a post
reserved for the Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner claimed to belong to Koli
Mahadeo, Scheduled Tribe and the caste claim of the petitioner was referred
to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The Scrutiny Committee
invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner on 17 th March 1998. Since the
respondent-Zilla Parishad was not aware of the order of invalidation, the
services of the petitioner were terminated on 10 th July 2008 after the Zilla
Parishad became aware of the said order. In view of the judgment of the
Full Bench (supra), the petitioner has sought for his reinstatement in service.
Shri Bute, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
since both the conditions that are required to be satisfied while seeking
protection of service in terms of the judgment of the Full Bench stand
satisfied in the case of the petitioner, the services of the petitioner are
required to be protected. It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed
before the cut-off date i.e. on 30.6.1995 and there is no observation in the
order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner has fraudulently secured
the benefits meant for the Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. It is stated that the
caste claim of the petitioner is invalidated as the petitioner could not prove
the same on the basis of documents and affinity test. It is submitted that the
order of termination may be quashed in the circumstances of the case and a
direction may be issued to the respondent-Zilla Parishad to reinstate the
petitioner in service.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent no.1-Zilla Parishad and
the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent no.
2-Committee do not dispute the position of law as laid down by the Full
Bench in the judgment reported in 2015 (1) Mh. L. J. 457. It is stated that it
appears from the appointment order that the petitioner was appointed on
30.6.1995 and there is no observation in the order of the Scrutiny
Committee that the petitioner has fraudulently secured the benefit meant for
the Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. It is submitted on behalf of the
respondent- Zilla Parishad that if the petitioner is reinstated in service, this
Court may reject the prayer of the petitioner for arrears of salary and/or
consequential benefits flowing from the order of continuity in service.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal
of the Full Bench judgment and the order of the Scrutiny Committee, it
appears that the services of the petitioner are required to be protected. The
petitioner was appointed before the cut-off date on 30.6.1995 and there is no
observation in the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner has
fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Koli Mahadeo Scheduled
Tribe. As rightly submitted on behalf of the petitioner, the caste claim of the
petitioner was invalidated as the petitioner could not prove the same on the
basis of the documents and affinity test. Since the petitioner has worked
with the respondent-Zilla Parishad for more than thirteen years, it would be
necessary to direct the Zilla Parishad to reinstate the petitioner in service.
5. For the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The
impugned order of termination is quashed and set aside. The respondent-
Zilla Parishad is directed to reinstate the petitioner in service as an Assistant
Teacher on the condition that the petitioner furnishes an undertaking in this
Court and to the respondent no. 1-Zilla Parishad within a period of four
weeks that neither the petitioner nor his progeny would claim the benefits
meant for the Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe, in future. The respondent-
Zilla Parishad is directed to reinstate the petitioner within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of the undertaking. Though the petitioner
would be entitled to reinstatement in service with continuity in service, the
petitioner would not be entitled to arrears of salary and/or any other
monetory benefits for the period during which he was out of service.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
V. M. DESHPANDE, J SMT VASANTI A. NAIK, J
joshi
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!