Bombay High Court
Kailash S/O Ramchandra Shrirame vs The State Of Mah.Thr.Secy.To ... on 16 August, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 wp 3714.01.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 3714/2001
Kailash s/o Ramchandra Shrirame,
Aged 31 years, M.Sc., B.Ed., Asstt. Teacher
employed in Vikas Vidyalaya Parsodi,
Wardha Road, Nagpur R/o.-C/o.-Shri P. S. Dhande,
Plot No.23, Durga Nagar,
Manewada Cement Rd., Nagpur. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1] The State of Maharashtra
through Secretary to Tribal Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2] Committee For Scrutiny and Verification
of Tribe Claim, through its Secretary
and Deputy Director (Research),
Adivasi Vikas Bhavan, Giripeth, Nagpur.
3] The State of Maharashtra through Secretary to
General Administration Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
4] Director of Education, Administrative Building, (Deleted as per Court's
Opp. Mantralaya, Mumbai- 400032, Order dated 10-12-02)
Pune District Pune.
5] Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.
6] Vikas Vidyalaya Parsodi, Wardha Road, (Intervenor)
Nagpur, through its Secretary, (Amended as per Court's
Vikas Education Society, order dated 26-03-02)
running Vikas Vidyalaya. R
ESPONDENTS
None for the petitioner.
None for the Intervenor.
Shri A.M. Kadukar, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 5.
Coram : Smt. Vasanti A Naik &
Kum. Indira Jain, JJ.
Dated : 16
August, 2016.
th
2 wp 3714.01.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this Writ Petition the petitioner challenges the order of the
respondent-Caste Scrutiny Committee dated 02-07-2001 invalidating the claim
of the petitioner of belonging to 'Mana'-Scheduled Tribe.
The petitioner claims to belong to 'Mana'-Scheduled Tribe and the
caste claim of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for
verification. The Scrutiny Committee conducted an vigilance enquiry and
after considering the documents tendered by the petitioner and the report of
the Vigilance Cell, the caste claim of the petitioner was invalidated by the
impugned order dated 02-07-2001.
We have perused the grounds raised in the petition and have heard the
learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 1 to 5. It
appears from a perusal of the grounds raised in the petition as also the notice
issued by the Scrutiny Committee to the petitioner to give his say on the
vigilance report, that the documents on which the vigilance report was based
were not supplied to the petitioner along with the Vigilance Cell Report. It
appears that along with the notice, the petitioner was only supplied with the
copy of the vigilance report and the statements of the persons recorded by
the Vigilance Officer, at Katol were not annexed to the report. In an affidavit
filed by the petitioner during the pendency of the Writ Petition, it is stated
that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has validated the claim of the sister, father
and brother of the petitioner to belong to 'Mana'-Scheduled Tribe. Also, it
3 wp 3714.01.odt
appears from the Writ Petition and on a perusal of the Vigilance Cell Report
that the Research Officer was not associated with the vigilance cell while
conducting the enquiry as required by the directions issued by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Kum. Madhuri Patil and another
vs Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development, Thane and others reported in AIR
1997 SC 2581. It further appears from the Vigilance Report that the
Vigilance Cell did not record the statements of the parents and the near
relatives of the petitioner, as required as per the directions of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in the judgment in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and
another vs Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others reported in
AIR 1995 SC 94.
On hearing the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondents and on a perusal of the order of the Scrutiny Committee and the
other documents that are annexed to the petition, in our view the impugned
order cannot be sustained. It appears that the petitioner was supplied with a
copy of the Vigilance Cell Report only and the other documents on the basis
of which the caste claim of the petitioner was invalidated were not supplied
to the petitioner by the respondent-Scrutiny Committee. Also, it appears from
the report of the vigilance cell, that the Vigilance Officer did not record the
statements of the parents and the near relatives of the petitioner as per the
directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in
AIR 1995 SC 94. It does not appear from the Vigilance Report that the
Research Officer was associated with the Vigilance Cell, as per the directions
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in AIR 1997 SC 2581.
4 wp 3714.01.odt
Since the petitioner's near relatives have been granted Caste Validity
Certificate, and since the order of the Scrutiny Committee suffers from the
aforesaid illegalities, the matter is liable to be remanded to the Scrutiny
Committee for a fresh decision on the caste claim of the petitioner.
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid the Writ Petition is partly allowed.
The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the
Scrutiny Committee for a fresh decision on the caste claim of the petitioner, in
accordance with law. The Scrutiny Committee should ensure that a notice is
served on the petitioner before deciding the caste claim as the petitioner is not
represented by a Counsel in the Court today.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUD
GE
Deshmukh
5 wp 3714.01.odt
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 : Uploaded on :
(Deshmukh) 18/08/2016
P.A. to the Hon'ble Judge.
