Bombay High Court
Sevak S/O. Nanaji Khadatkar vs Geetadevi Khandelwal Institute ... on 14 June, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
wp3556.15 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3556 OF 2015
Sevak s/o Nanaji Khadatkar,
aged about 44 years,
occupation - Lecturer in
Geetadevi Khandelwal Institute
of Pharmacy, r/o Ravi Nagar,
Akola. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. Geetadevi Khandelwal Institute
of Pharmacy, through its Principal,
Godbole Plots, Akola 444 002.
2. Directorate of Technical Education,
State of Maharashtra, 3, Mahapalika
Marg, Mumbai - 1.
3. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Adiwasi Vikas
Bhawan, Giripeth, Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
Shri R.S. Parsodkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs. P.M. Chandekar, Advocate for respondent No. 1.
Shri N.R. Patil, AGP for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
.....
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
JUNE 14, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard
finally with the consent of Shri Parsodkar, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mrs. Chandekar, learned counsel for respondent
No. 1 and Shri Patil, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
2. The petitioner, now aged about 44 years, got Caste
certificate on 19.05.1986, showing that he belongs to Halba,
Scheduled Tribe. On the basis of that certificate, he completed
his education and then came to be appointed on 10.08.1998 as
Lecturer in Respondent No. 1 - Private aided college. His caste
claim has been invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee vide
order dated 06.06.2015. That order is questioned before this
Court.
3. Upon instructions, Shri Parsodkar, learned counsel
states that the petitioner restricts his challenge only to grant of
protection in employment in terms of Full Bench judgment of
this Court in the case of Arun Vishwanath Sonone vs. State of
Maharashtra & Ors., 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457. He points out that the
Scrutiny Committee has not found any tampering of either School
records or any fraud played by the petitioner for the purposes of
procuring certificate or employment.
4. Shri Patil, learned AGP as also Mrs. Chandekar, learned
counsel for the respective respondents are opposing the petition.
5. However, we find that the absence of any observation
in the order of Scrutiny Committee indicating involvement of the
petitioner in any fraud or interpolation of documents is not in
dispute. The petitioner has joined the employment in August 1998
and he got caste certificate when he was hardly 15 years of age. In
this situation, we find him entitled to grant of protection in terms of
judgment of Full Bench of this Court mentioned supra. In view of
this finding, it is apparent that the petitioner shall be entitled to
release of his withheld increments and benefits.
6. Therefore, subject to the petitioner filing an
undertaking before the Registry of this Court, with his employer and
with Respondent No 3 - Scrutiny Committee that neither he, nor his
progeny shall claim benefit or status as Halba Scheduled Tribe,
within a period of four weeks from today, his employment shall
remain protected and shall not be disturbed only on account of the
order of Scrutiny Committee dated 06.06.2015.
7. Writ Petition is thus partly allowed and disposed of.
Rule is made absolute in above terms. However, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
******
*GS.
