Bombay High Court
Jyoti Manohar Dode vs Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate ... on 8 December, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp5555.16.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5555/2016
PETITIONER: Jyoti Manohar Dode
Aged 42 years, Occu. Service,
R/o Amarnath, District Thane.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, through its
Member Secretary, Bhatkuli Road,
Amravati.
2. Principal, Shri R.K. Abhang Madhyamik
Vidyalaya, Ulhas Nagar - 421 004
Distt. Thane
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.D. Khati, Advocate for petitioner
Mrs. G.R. Tiwari, AGP for respondent no.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, AND
MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 08.12.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard
finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned Counsel
for the parties.
By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the
Scrutiny Committee, dated 23.5.2016, invalidating the claim of the
petitioner of belonging to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe.
wp5555.16.odt
The petitioner was appointed as a Shikshan Sevak on a post
earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes on 1.10.2003. The caste claim of the
petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The
Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by the
order, dated 23.5.2016. The petitioner has impugned the said order in the
instant case.
Shri Khati, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that
though the petitioner received the notice, dated 20.12.2014, calling the
petitioner for hearing, the petitioner failed to remain present before the
Committee and submit her explanation. It is stated that the petitioner was
working as a school teacher and she did not understand the repercussions
of not remaining present before the Scrutiny Committee after the show-
cause-notice was served on her. It is stated that the petitioner possesses
some relevant material, which she could have pointed out before the
Scrutiny Committee but she failed to remain present before the Scrutiny
Committee and bring the same to the notice of the Committee. It is stated
that this Court may take a lenient and sympathetic view in the matter and
remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee as the petitioner would lose
her job on the basis of the order of the Scrutiny Committee. It is stated
that one opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner as the
petitioner has already paid the costs of Rs.5,000/-, as directed by this
wp5555.16.odt
Court.
Mrs. Tiwari, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the Scrutiny Committee states that the Scrutiny Committee
has rightly rejected the caste claim of the petitioner. It is stated that
despite the service of the notice on the petitioner, the petitioner failed to
remain present and submit her explanation to the Vigilance Report and
the queries made by the Committee. It is stated that in the circumstances
of the case, the impugned order may not be set aside.
In the circumstances of the case, we find that one last
opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner by considering this
petition to be a mercy petition. The petitioner is working as an Assistant
Teacher since her appointment as a Shikshan Sevak in the year 2003 and
since the petitioner claims that she could have properly explained the
show-cause-notice, an opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner as
she would lose her job on the basis of the order of the Scrutiny
Committee. Since the petitioner has stated that she was not able to attend
the hearing before the Scrutiny Committee due to her busy schedule, it
would be necessary to direct the Scrutiny Committee to grant one last
opportunity to the petitioner to submit her explanation and give her say
on the show-cause-notice, more so, when the petitioner has paid the costs
of Rs.5,000/- as per our directions, due to her mistake. In the peculiar
wp5555.16.odt
facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to take a lenient view
in the matter and remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for a
fresh decision on merits after granting an opportunity to the petitioner to
participate in the hearing.
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 merits, after
hearing the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the
Scrutiny Committee on 09.01.2017 so that the issuance of notice to the
petitioner could be dispensed with.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
