Bombay High Court
Ku.Nanda Dhanraj Moundekar vs The State Of Mah. & Another on 26 August, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 wp3905.00.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3905 OF 2000
Ku. Nanda d/o. Dhanraj Moudekar,
Aged about 26 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Vinkar Colony, MIG, 10/2,
Ring Road, Manewada,
Nagpur. .......... APPELLANT
// VERSUS //
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Secretary,
Department of Irrigation,
Mantralaya,
Mumbai-32.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 01/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 02/09/2016 23:56:07 :::
2 wp3905.00.odt
____________________________________________________________
Mr.V.V.Bhangde, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Mr.T.H.Udeshi, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1/State.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI
AND
V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : 26th AUGUST, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. GAVAI, J) :
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard
by consent.
2. Though the petitioner has approached this Court
being aggrieved by the order passed by the Scrutiny
Committee dt.9.8.2000, the petitioner has now given up
her claim of belonging to Scheduled Tribe and has only
prayed for protection of her service.
3. The petitioner claimed to be belonging to 'Halba'
Scheduled Tribe. She was appointed as a Clerk-cum-Typst
on 5.8.1998 in the Irrigation Department of the State of
3 wp3905.00.odt
Maharashtra. Since she was appointed against the post
reserved for Scheduled Tribe, her caste claim was referred
to the Validity Committee for verification. By the
impugned order, her claim is invalidated. Hence, the
petitioner has approached this Court.
3. While admitting the present petition, this Court
has granted interim relief vide order dt.31.8.2001. As such,
the petitioner is continuously in service. The Full Bench of
this Court in the case of Arun s/o Vishwanath Sonone vs.
State of Maharashtra, through
its Secretary, Department of
Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 and Ors.
reported in 2015
(1) Mh.L.J. 457 has held that where a candidate's claim has
been invalidated and where the candidate has put in a
substantial number of service and where there is no finding of
fraud against the candidate, the Court can exercise powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to protect the
services of such candidate. Perusal of the impugned order would
show that there is no finding of fraud against the petitioner.
4 wp3905.00.odt
4. We find that the present case is squarely covered by
the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of
Arun s/o. Vishwanath Sonone (cited supra). The petition is,
therefore, partly allowed. The respondents are directed not to
terminate the services of the petitioner. The petitioner would
be entitled to continuity in service. However, it is made clear
that the petitioner would not be entitled to any of the benefits
on the basis of her claim of belonging to Scheduled Tribe and
she would be treated to be an open category candidate for all
purposes.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
5 wp3905.00.odt
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed Judgment.
Uploaded by : Jaiswal, P.S. Uploaded on : 1.9.2016.
