Attam Balaji Pokle vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3611 Bom

                                                                                      28.odt
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 634 OF 2016




                                                                              
           Attam s/o Balaji Pokle,                     ... Petitioner 
           Age 27 years, Occu: Service,




                                                      
           R/o Telangwadi, Tq. Kandhar
           District Nanded

           VERSUS




                                                     
    1. The State of Maharashtra,
       Through Secretary to Tribal 
       Development Department,
       Mantralaya, Mumbai




                                               
    2. The Divisional Joint Director 
                                  
       of Agriculture, Amarawati 
       Division, Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur
                                 
    3. The District Superintending 
       Agricultural Officer, Wardha, 
       District Wardha.
      


    4. The Technical Officer,
       Biological Pest Control 
   



       Laboratory, Seloo, 
       Tq. Seloo,District Wardha.





    5. The Scheduled Tribe             ...  Respondents.
       Certificate Verification 
       Committee, Aurangabad, through 
       its Deputy Director (R), 
       Aurangabad.





    Mr. Sunil M. Vibhute, Advocate for the Petitioner,
    Mr. M. B. Bharaswadkar, Advocate for the Respondents

                                        CORAM   :  R. M. BORDE & 
                                                    K. L. WADANE, JJ.
                                         DATE   :   5th July, 2016

    ORDER:                                

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

28.odt learned AGP for the respondents.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the

petition is heard for final disposal by the consent of

learned counsel for the respective parties.

3. The petitioner claims to belong to Mannervarlu,

Scheduled Tribe and has been appointed as a Krishi

Sevak(Agricultural Assistant)against the post reserved

for Scheduled Tribe category. The tribe certificate

issued to the petitioner has been referred for

validation to Respondent No.5 Committee and the

validation proceeding in respect of the tribe

certificate is stated to be pending with the Committee

since 11.09.2013. It is informed that the Committee

has not yet decided the matter.

4. In the facts of the case, respondent No.5

Committee is directed to decide the validation claim in

respect of the tribe certificate issued to the

petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably

within a period of eight months from today.

5. The petitioner contends that he has completed

three years service as Krishi Sevak (Agricultural

Assistant) and as such, in view of clause (6) of the

28.odt appointment order, his claim shall have to be

considered for regularization. Clause 6 of the

appointment order stipulates regularization of the

employee on completion of three years satisfactory

service, subject to availability of posts. The

respondents shall take appropriate decision in respect

of regularization of services of the petitioner

subject to the decision in respect of validation of

tribe claim pending with the Scrutiny Committee, as

early as possible, preferably within a period of eight

weeks from today.

6. With the directions as above, writ petition is

disposed of. Rule is accordingly made absolute. There

shall be no order as to costs.

     (K. L. WADANE, J.)                   (R. M. BORDE, J. ) 
    JPC