Bombay High Court
Vasant Jagdeo Donge(Thakur) vs State Of Maharashtra & 2 Ors on 1 August, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
wp2711.03 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH
WRIT PETITION NO. 2711 OF 2003
Vasant s/o Jagdeo Donge (Thakur),
aged about 40 years, occupation -
Service, r/o Near Municipal High
School, Shegaon, Tahsil - Shegaon,
District - Buldhana. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
through Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Member-Secretary,
Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims,
Amravati, c/o office of the
Commissioner, Irwin Chowk,
Near Employment Exchange,
Morshi Road, Amravati.
3. Chief Officer,
Municipal Council, Shegaon,
District - Buldhana. ... RESPONDENTS
None for the petitioner.
Shri I.J. Damle, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
Shri N.R. Saboo, Advocate for respondent No. 3.
.....
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
AUGUST 01, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Nobody appears for the petitioner even on third
call. It appears that the petition dismissed on 08.04.2015 in
default, was restored thereafter on 25.01.2016.
2. With the assistance of Shri Damle, learned AGP
counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Shri Saboo, learned
counsel for respondent No. 3, we have perused the case papers.
3. Respondent No. 2 - Committee has, by the
impugned order dated 10.02.2003, invalidated the caste claim
of the petitioner as belonging to Thakur, Scheduled Tribe. That
order is stayed by this Court on 28.07.2003 and, therefore, the
petitioner continues in service.
4. Shri Saboo, learned counsel invites attention to the
fact that the petition has been amended on 09.02.2016 and it
appears that the petitioner wanted protection in employment.
5. The record shows that the petitioner is born on
05.05.1961 and the caste certificate is issued on 25.01.1982.
He has relied upon several documents in which the caste has
been recorded as Thakur. However, the Vigilance Cell
authorities and Respondent No. 2 - Committee has conducted
inquiry and found that the petitioner does not belong to
Thakur, Scheduled Tribe. On the basis of customs and
anthropological traits, this conclusion has been reached. The
challenge in the petition does not show this application of mind
to be erroneous or perverse.
6. The petitioner has joined the employment of
Respondent No. 3 - Municipal Council as a daily wager on
25.04.1980 and he was regularized on 22.12.1983. In the light
of material available on record, it cannot be said that the
petitioner has practiced any fraud or manipulated any
document for the purposes of procuring caste certificate or
employment.
7. In this situation, considering the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in the case of Arun Vishwanath Sonone
vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported at 2015 (1) Mh.L.J.
457 (FB), we find him entitled to protection of employment.
Accordingly, subject to the petitioner filing an undertaking
within a period of six weeks from today with this Court,
Scrutiny Committee and his employer that neither he nor his
progeny shall claim status or benefit as Thakur, Scheduled
Tribe, his employment shall remain protected.
8.
Subject to this, writ petition is disposed of. Rule
accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
******
*GS.
C E R T I F I C A T E
"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct
copy of original signed Judgment."
Uploaded by : G. Shamdasani
Uploaded on : 03.08.2016.
