Ku. Sneha D/O Chhagan Gaikwad Thr. ... vs Scheduled Tribe Certificate ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 71 Bom

     WP6937.15 (J).odt                             1




                                                                               
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                       
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                              WRIT PETITION NO.6937 OF 2015




                                                      
     Ku. Sneha d/o Chhagan Gaikwad,
     Aged 17 years, Occupation-Student,




                                              
     through natural guardian father
     Chhagan Nitaram Gaikwad,
     Aged 56 years, R/o. Amgaon (Khurd),
     Post-Ghonad, Tahsil-Sakoli,
     District-Bhandara.                                 ..             Petitioner
                            
                                    .. Versus ..
      

     1]     Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
            Nagpur, through its Chairman, Committee
   



            for Scheduled Tribe Claims, Office at
            Second Floor Adiwasi Vikas Bhawan,
            Giripeth, in front of R.T.O. Nagpur.





     2]     State of Maharashtra, through its
            Secretary, Tribal Development 
            Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

     3]     The Director of Medical Education &





            Research, Fort, Mumbai.

     4]     The Principal, R.J.V.S. Bhaiyyasaheb
            Sawant Ayurvedic Mahavidyalaya,
            Sawantwadi, Office at Sutikagruha
            Parisar, Khaskilwada, Sawantwadi,
            Tah. Sawantwadi, Distt. Sindhudurg.

     5]     The Registrar, Maharashtra University
            of Health Science, Nashik, Wani Road,
            Mashrul, Nashik-422 004.              ..                   Respondents


    ::: Uploaded on - 29/02/2016                       ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 06:37:20 :::
      WP6937.15 (J).odt                             2




                                                                                  
     Shri Prashant P. Dhok, Counsel for the petitioner,




                                                          
     Shri N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 3,
     Shri N.D. Thombre, Counsel for the respondent no.5.
                           ..........




                                                         
                                   CORAM :  SMT. VASANTI  A. NAIK  AND
                                            A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

DATED : FEBRUARY 25, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard

finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the

respondent-Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the

petitioner within a time frame. The petitioner seeks a direction to the

respondent-University and the college-management to protect the

education of the petitioner till her caste claim is decided.

The petitioner claims to belong to "Mana", Scheduled Tribe

and the caste claim of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny

Committee for verification on 10.7.2013. The Scrutiny Committee has

not decided the caste claim of the petitioner till date. The petitioner

was admitted to the B.A.M.S. Degree Course in the year 2015-2016, on a

seat reserved for the Scheduled Tribes. According to the petitioner,

though the petitioner is not at fault in not producing the caste validity

certificate, the college-management and the University are proposing to

take adverse action against the petitioner for not producing the caste

validity certificate. It is submitted that a direction may be issued to the

Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner and the

education of the petitioner should be protected till then.

Shri Rao, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the Scrutiny Committee states, on instructions,

that the caste claim of the petitioner is pending before the Scrutiny

Committee and the same would be decided as early as possible.

Shri Thombre, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondent no.5, states that the caste certificate of the petitioner is not

verified till date and, therefore, the University has not received the

proposal for granting registration and eligibility. It is stated that in view

of the failure on the part of the petitioner to produce the caste validity

certificate, adverse action was proposed against the petitioner.

On the statement made by the learned Assistant Government

Pleader that the caste claim of the petitioner is pending, we allow the

writ petition and direct the respondent-Scrutiny Committee to decide the

caste claim of the petitioner as early as possible and positively within a

period of one year from the date of appearance of the petitioner before

the Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the

Scrutiny Committee on 7.3.2016. Since the petitioner was not at fault

in not producing the caste validity certificate, the education of the

petitioner is protected till her caste claim is decided. The college-

management and the University should permit the petitioner to

prosecute her studies and to appear at the examination, if there is no

other impediment in doing so, till her caste claim is decided.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

                              JUDGE                                          JUDGE
                            
     Gulande