Bombay High Court
Payal D/O Ashok Garate vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste ... on 2 March, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
wp6864.13 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6864 OF 2013
Payal d/o Ashok Garate,
aged about 20 years,
occupation - MBBS Student,
Government Medical College
& Hospital, r/o Rural Hospital,
Ghatanji, Taluka - Ghatanji,
District - Yavatmal, presently
at Ladies Hostel No. 2,
G.M.C., Nagpur. ... PETITIONER
ig Versus
1. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati,
through its Member Secretary,
Erwin Chowk, Amravati.
2. Maharashtra University of
Health Sciences, through its
Joint Registrar, Vani Road,
Mhasrul, Nashik 422 004.
3. Government Medical College
& Hospital, Nagpur, through
its Dean, Government Medical
College, Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
Shri R.S. Parsodkar with Shri A.M. Balpande, Advocates for the
petitioner.
Shri V.P. Maldhure, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 & 3.
Shri A. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
.....
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
MARCH 02, 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, Shri Maldhure, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 & 3
and Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.
2. The order dated 11.10.2013, invalidating the caste
claim of the petitioner as belonging to Mana, Scheduled Tribe,
forms subject matter of challenge. This Court has on 24.12.2013,
while issuing notice in the matter, protected her education. This
order has been continued thereafter on 17.02.2014 and
12.03.2014. It is not in dispute that the order is still in force.
3. After noticing the effort of the petitioner to
demonstrate that a blood relation in the branch of Hiraman
Mukunda Garate has been given validity on 01.11.2006, this Court
has passed the following order on 01.02.2016.
"Heard Shri Parsodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Shri V.P. Maldhure, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 & 3 and
Shri Abhijit Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.
This court on 12.02.2015 noted the contention of the
petitioner that in the branch of relative i.e. branch of Hiraman
Mukunda Garate, caste claim came to be validated on
01.11.2006 and that validity has not been looked into by the
Caste Scrutiny committee while invalidating the caste claim of
the petitioner. Hence, on that day, the then counsel for
respondent No. 1 - Scrutiny Committee was given time of two
weeks. It appears that thereafter on 18.06.2015, this Court
directed Vigilance inquiry into the claim of the petitioner that
said branch of Hiraman Mukunda Garate is related to him. The
investigation was to be completed within three weeks and report
was to be filed.
After 18.06.2015, though the matter has been listed
before this Court on 09.07.2015, 23.07.2015 and thereafter on
19.01.2016, no report has been filed. There is no affidavit also
by the Scrutiny Committee or its Vigilance Cell.
This Court has already directed Respondent No. 1 -
Committee to file suitable affidavit without fail within three
weeks. If the affidavit and report is not made available, the
Member Secretary shall remain present with all relevant records
on the next date.
Place the matter for further consideration on 24.02.2016.
An ordinary copy of this order shall be furnished to the
learned counsel for respondent No. 1 - Committee."
4. After this order, Respondent No. 1 - Committee has
filed additional reply on 25.02.2016. A perusal of that reply shows
that the police authorities visited Hiraman Mukunda Garate and
Hiraman accepted that the petitioner is his relative.
5. In this situation, though the learned AGP is seeking
time to point out further developments in the matter, however, as
the matter is to be looked into by the Committee, we find that the
impugned order passed by the Scrutiny Committee cannot be
sustained.
6. In the present matter, this Court is not considering
whether the validity given to said Hiraman Mukunda Garate by
Gadchiroli Committee is right or wrong, as such the matter need
not be sent to Gadchiroli Committee.
7. The fact that the blood relative has got the validity is
not in dispute. The impact of that validity needs to be looked into
by Respondent No. 1 on quasi judicial side. The impact cannot be
pointed out by filing an affidavit either of some Vigilance Authority
or of Research Officer.
8. We, therefore, quash and set aside the order dated
11.10.2013. The competent Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny
Committee shall look into the case of the petitioner in the light of
material made available to it after extending an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh order in accordance with
law.
9. We direct the petitioner to appear before Respondent
No. 1 - Committee for said purpose on 28.03.2016 and to abide by
its further instructions in the matter. The Committee shall attempt
to take a fresh decision as per law within next 12 weeks. Till the
Committee passes further appropriate orders in the mater, interim
order passed by this Court in the writ petition shall continue and if
the result of the petitioner for any examination is not declared, the
College and the University shall arrange to declare it. However, the
declaration of such result and performance of the petitioner shall
be subject to further orders of Respondent No. 1 - Committee, on
her caste verification.
10. Writ petition is thus partly allowed and disposed of.
Rule accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
******
*GS.
