Bombay High Court
Malkhansing Mangalsing Sable vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 21 June, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
wp6385.16.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 6385 OF 2016
Malkhansing Mangalsing Sable
age major, occ. Service
r/o At post Godri,
Tq. Jamner
Dist. Jalgaon .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Tribal Development,
Mantralaya,
Mumbai
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee
Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar
Dist. Nandurbar.
3. The Deputy Collector,
Central Building,
Near Sasson Hospital,
Pune,
Tq. & Dist. Pune.
4. Sub Divisional Officer,
Mawal Mulshi Sub Division Pune
Tq. Baramati, Dist. Pune .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. Girish Nagori, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. M.B. Bharaswadkar, AGP for the State.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE : 21st JUNE, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective
parties.
wp6385.16.doc
3. Petitioner claims to be belonging to 'Naikda' tribe which is recognised
as Scheduled Tribe. Petitioner was appointed as Talathi in the year 2012 as
against the vacancy earmarked for Scheduled Tribe category. Petitioner
states that the proposal in respect of validation of the tribe certificate issued
in his favour was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division,
Nandurbar vide outward no. 122 and, validation claim is pending with the
Committee since then. Respondent no. 4 issued show cause notice to
petitioner calling upon him to submit validation certificate within specified
period and, as a result of failure of petitioner to submit validation
certificate, his services have been terminated since 25.05.2016. It is not a
matter of dispute that validation claim in respect of the certificate issued to
petitioner is pending with the Scrutiny Committee since 2012 and that, as a
result of failure of the Committee to decide the claim, petitioner has been
penalised and his services have been terminated. It is not within the reach
of petitioner to secure validation certificate within specified period and, as a
result of failure of the Committee to take decision in the matter, petitioner
cannot be put to dis-advantage.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition can be
disposed of by issuing direction to the Scrutiny Committee to take decision
on the validation claim in respect of certificate issued to the petitioner, as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight months from
today and, it is accordingly directed. Order passed by the Sub-Divisional
Officer on 25.05.2016 directing termination of services of petition stands
quashed and set aside and the concerned respondent is directed to re-
wp6385.16.doc
instate petitioner in employment subject to decision on the validation claim
in respect of certificate issued in favour of petitioner and pending with the
Scrutiny Committee. Rule is accordingly made absolute. No costs.
( K. L. WADANE ) ( R. M. BORDE )
JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
