Bombay High Court
Sunita Balaji Mutake vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 27 July, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
wp4543.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4543 OF 2016
Sunita Balaji Mutake,
Age-32 years, Occu:Service,
R/o-Sneh Nagar, Police Colony,
Nanded, Tq. & Dist-Nanded.
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through it's Secretary,
Agriculture Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai,
2) The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad,
Through its Deputy Director (R),
3) The Registrar (Kulsachiv),
The Mahatma Phule Agricultural
University, Rahuri, Tq-Rahuri,
Dist-Ahmednagar.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.Pratap V. Jadhavar Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent Nos.1
and 2.
Mr. M.N. Navandar Advocate for Respondent
No.3.
...
::: Uploaded on - 28/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:34:35 :::
wp4543.16
2
CORAM: R.M. BORDE AND
A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.
DATE : 27TH JULY, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER R.M. BORDE, J.] :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the
consent of the learned counsel for the parties,
taken up for final disposal.
2. The Petitioner claims to be belonging to
"Mannervarlu", Scheduled Tribe. On the strength of
the certificate issued in favour of the Petitioner
by the competent authority certifying that she
belongs to "Mannervarlu", Scheduled Tribe, the
Petitioner has been inducted in the employment
with Respondent No.3 as a clerk/typist since the
year 2014. The tribe certificate issued in favour
of the Petitioner has been referred for
verification to Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee
and it is stated that the proposal is pending. As
a result of failure of Petitioner to submit
wp4543.16
validation certificate within the stipulated
period, her services came to be terminated by the
employer in view of the order issued on 29th April
2016. The Petitioner claims that she has every
hope of success in the validation proceedings
since her real brother has been issued validity
certificate by Respondent No.2 Committee.
3.
In view of the Judgment of the Division Bench
of this Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay
Nichale vs. Divisional Caste Scrtiny Committee
No.1 and others, reported in 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401,
normally the Petitioner is entitled to claim the
validation certificate. However, it would be
appropriate for the Scrutiny Committee to apply
mind to the record and take appropriate decision.
4. Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is
directed to take decision in respect of the tribe
certificate verification claim of the Petitioner
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within
wp4543.16
SIX MONTHS from today and it is accordingly
directed.
5. Respondent No.3 shall reinstate the Petitioner
in employment from 1st August 2016, subject to
result of the tribe certificate verification claim
pending with Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee.
6.
The Petitioner undertakes that she will not
claim the back wages during the intervening period
from 29th April 2016 till 1st August 2016.
7. In view of above, Rule is made absolute to the
extent as specified above. There shall be no order
as to the costs.
. Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this
order.
[A.I.S.CHEEMA, J.] [R.M. BORDE, J.]
asb/JUL16
