Bombay High Court
Narsappa Narayanrao Raulwar vs Scheduled Tribe Certificate ... on 30 March, 2016
Bench: A.V. Nirgude
1 WP 1051/2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1051 OF 2016
Narsappa S/o. Narayanrao Raulwar, Aged 57 PETITIONER
Years, Occupation Service, Resident of
Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded
V E R S U S
1 Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, RESPONDENTS
Aurangabad, Through its Member Secretary
2 Zilla Parishad, Nanded, Through its Chief
Executive Officer
3
Executive Engineer, Construction Department,
Zilla Parishad, Nanded
4
Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti,
Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded
Mr. Sagar S. Phatale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A.G. Magre, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 - State
Mr. R.K. Ingole, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4
CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE &
V.L. ACHLIYA, JJ.
DATE : 30th March, 2016
2 WP 1051/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: V.L. Achliya, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of learned
counsel for the parties, the petition is heard finally at the stage of
admission.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. In view of the limited relief claimed in the petition seeking
direction to expedite the process of verification of Caste claim of the
petitioner and extend the benefit under the Assured Career Progression
Scheme, the petition is heard and taken up for final disposal at the stage
of admission with the consent of both the sides.
4. In brief the facts of the case are that the petitioner was
appointed in the year 1981 as a Tracer with respondent no. 2 and
subsequently posted as 'Junior Draftsman'. Since joining of service in the
year 1981, the petitioner was never asked for submission of Caste Validity
Certificate. Pursuant to the Government Circular dated 8 th May, 2013, the
petitioner was asked to submit the proposal in prescribed proforma for
verification of Caste Certificate that he belongs to 'Manerwarlu' i.e. the
caste included as Scheduled Tribe. Accordingly, the proposal was
forwarded to the Caste Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad. The proposal
for verification of Caste Certificate of the petitioner is pending with
respondent no. 4 - Committee. Although the petitioner has completed
more than 12 years his service, the Department has not extended the
benefit of 12 years Time Bound Promotion under the Assured Career
3 WP 1051/2016
Probation Scheme. Vide letter dated 29th October, 2015, the petitioner was
communicated that benefit of the said Scheme will not be granted to him
unless the certificate of validation of caste claim is produced before the
competent authority. In view of the communication dated 29 th October,
2015, the petitioner has filed the petition and claimed the direction to
respondent no. 1 - Caste Scrutiny Committee to expedite and decide the
caste claim of the petitioner with further direction to respondent nos. 2 to 4
to extend the benefit of 12 years Time Bound Promotion under the
Assured Career Probation Scheme without insisting for submission of
validity certificate.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the State
Government has taken policy decision to extend 12 years Time Bound
Promotion under the Assured Career Probation Scheme to its employee
only with a view to avoid stagnation. In the said Scheme, no where it is
stated that the Time Bound Promotion of the employee, who has
completed 12 years service in one cadre, should be withheld till the
submission of Caste Certificate on subject to validation of caste certificate.
It is further contended that the impugned communication dated 29th
October, 2015 is improper and contrary to object of the Scheme.
6. Learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1 - Caste Scrutiny
Committee submits that the petitioner has submitted the proposal for
validation of the Caste Certificate in the year 2015 and inquiry is in
progress. It is further submitted that looking to the pendency of number of
cases before the Scrutiny Committee, it may not be possible to complete
the enquiry in short time.
4 WP 1051/2016
7. We have perused the copy of appointment letter dated 29 th
July, 1981, placed on record as Annexure 'B' of the Petition. The
appointment of the petitioner was not made subject to submission of Caste
Validity Certificate. The fact is not in dispute that the proposal for
verification of the caste claim of the petitioner has been first time
forwarded in the year 2015 pursuant to the direction of the State
Government. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the initial
appointment of the petitioner is not made against vacancy/post reserved
for Scheduled Tribe. In our view, the insistence of respondent nos. 2 to 4
to produce the Caste Validity Certificate in order to examine the case of
the petitioner to extend the benefit under the said Scheme, is totally
unwarranted. It has been rightly argued by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the Assured Career Probation Scheme has been framed by
the Government with the object to avoid stagnation. The employee to
whom benefit of such scheme is extended, he has to work in same cadre.
He is only entitled for next higher pay scale. Thus there is no nexus
between the extension of benefit of the Scheme and submission of Caste
Validity Certificate. The extension of benefit under the scheme not results
in promotion to higher post. Therefore, the insistence of respondent nos.
2 to 4 to withhold the extension of benefit of the Assured Career Probation
Scheme is totally unjustified.
8. As per the Scheme framed by the Government, the benefit of
the Scheme deserves to be given to a person who has completed 12
years of service and fulfills criteria laid down under the said Scheme.
Under the Scheme, the submission of Caste Validity Certificate is not laid
5 WP 1051/2016
down as one of the condition precedent to avail the benefit of the Scheme.
Since the extension of the benefit is not of promotion from the post of
lower cadre to higher cadre, the insistence of Caste Validity Certificate by
respondents appears to be improper.
8. In view of above, we are inclined to allow the Petition in terms
of prayer clause 'A' and 'B'. Caste Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad, the
respondent no. 1 is directed to expedite the proposal of caste verification
of the petitioner and decide the same as expeditiously as possible and
preferably within 12 months from the date of passing of this order. We
further direct respondent nos. 2 to 4 to consider the claim of the petitioner
for extending the benefit of Service Assured Career Progression Scheme
without insisting for submission of Caste Validity Certificate. The decision
in this behalf be taken as expeditiously as possible within a period of six
months from the date of passing of this order. Accordingly, Writ Petition is
allowed in terms of prayer clauses 'A' and 'B'.
Rule made absolute in above terms.
( V.L. ACHLIYA, J. ) ( A.V. NIRGUDE, J. )
srm/30/3/16
