Bombay High Court
Digambar S/O Harishchandra ... vs Scheduled Tribe Certificate ... on 25 July, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
WP 2629/16 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 2629/2016
Digambar S/o Harishchandra Patkar,
Age-43, Occu-Service, R/o- Shivnagar,
Tq-Telhara & Dist. Akola. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee Division, Amravati
through its Chairman, Irvin Chouk,
Amravati, Tq. Dist-Amravati.
2. Late Narayanrao Bihade Vidyalaya,
Warud (bud), Ta. Telhara, Dist. Akola
through Principal. ig RESPONDENTS
Shri M.V. Bute, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri A.M. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.1.
Shri R.M. Ahirrao, counsel for the respondent no.2.
CORAM :SMT.VASANTI A NAIK AND
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 25 TH JULY, 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.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has sought a direction against
the respondent no.2-Principal of the school not to terminate the services
of the petitioner and protect his services in view of the judgment of the
Full Bench, reported in 2015(1) Mh.L.J. 457 (Arun Vishwanath Sonone
Versus State of Maharashtra & Others).
WP 2629/16 2 Judgment
3. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on
21.06.1999 on a post earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner
claimed to belong to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. The caste claim of
the petitioner was sent to the Scrutiny Committee for verification and the
Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by the
order dated 18.04.2016. The petitioner has given up the challenge to the
order of the Scrutiny Committee and has prayed only for the protection of
the services of the petitioner by placing reliance on the judgment of the
Full Bench.
4. Shri Bute, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that
both the conditions, that are required to be satisfied while seeking the
protection of services, stand satisfied in case of the petitioner, inasmuch
as the petitioner was appointed before the cut-off date in June-1999 and
there is no observation in the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the
petitioner has fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Koli
Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. It is stated that the caste claim of the
petitioner was invalidated as in certain documents pertaining to the
relatives of the petitioner, in stead of 'Koli Mahadeo', 'Koli' was recorded
in the caste column. It is stated that in the circumstances of the case, a
direction may be issued against the respondent no.2 to protect the
services of the petitioner.
WP 2629/16 3 Judgment
5. Shri Madiwale, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1 and Shri Ahirrao, the learned
counsel for the respondent no.2-School, do not dispute the position of law
as laid down by the Full Bench as far as the claim for protection of
services is concerned. It is, however, stated on behalf of the respondent
no.2 that it appears from the observation made in paragraph 4 of the
order of the Scrutiny Committee that the caste certificate of the petitioner
was not issued by the competent authority and this shows that the
petitioner has fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Koli
Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe.
6. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a
perusal of the order of the Scrutiny Committee, we find that the caste
claim of the petitioner is invalidated only because the petitioner could not
prove it on the basis of the documents and the affinity test. There is no
observation whatsoever against the petitioner in the order of the Scrutiny
Committee, in regard to fraud committed by the petitioner by
interpolating the documents or fabricating them. We do not find
anything in the order of the Scrutiny Committee, as stated on behalf of
the respondent no.2, to mean that the caste certificate was not issued in
favour of the petitioner by the competent authority and, hence, the
petitioner has played fraud on the respondent no.2. We do not find
WP 2629/16 4 Judgment
anything in paragraph no.4 of the order of the Scrutiny Committee that
the petitioner has fraudulently secured the benefits meant for the Koli
Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. As rightly stated on behalf of the petitioner,
since both the conditions, that are required to be satisfied in view of the
judgment of the Full Bench, stand satisfied in case of the petitioner while
seeking the protection of services, it would be necessary to direct the
respondent no.2 to protect the services of the petitioner.
7.
Hence for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.
The respondent no.2 is directed to protect the services of the petitioner on
the post of Assistant Teacher, only on the condition that the petitioner
furnishes an undertaking in this Court and before the respondent no.2,
within a period of four weeks that neither the petitioner nor his progeny
would claim the benefits meant for the Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe, in
future.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
WP 2629/16 5 Judgment
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true
and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order.
Uploaded by: Rohit D. Apte. Uploaded on : 27.07.2016.
