Bombay High Court
Anjali D/O Hanumansingh Dange vs State Of Maha & Othes on 10 March, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
J-wp3656.97.odt 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION No.3656 OF 1997
Ku. Anjali D/o. Hanumansingh Dange,
Resident of L-12,
Vidarbha Housing Board Colony,
Tilak Wadi, Yavatmal,
Tahsil and District Yavatmal. : PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through Social Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400 032.
2. The Caste Verification Scrutiny Committee,
Amravati Division, Amravati.
3. Naib Tahsildar, Yavatmal,
Tahsil and District Yavatmal. : RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr. H.S. Chitaley h/f. Mr. S.V. Manohar, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. D.M. Kale, Asstt. Government Pleader for the Respondents.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.
th
DATE : 10 MARCH, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.)
1. Without prejudice to other contentions available in the
J-wp3656.97.odt 2/4
matter Advocate H.S. Chitelay submits that the impugned order of
Scrutiny Committee dated 22.7.1997 is unsustainable as Committee
consisted only of two members. He relying upon the judgment of
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and
another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and
others, reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 as modified by later judgment
between same parties reported in AIR 1997 SC 2581, submits that
the Committee ought to have been consisting of at least 3 members
with the designation and status as mentioned in later judgment of
Hon'ble Apex Court.
2. Assistant Government Pleader Shri D.M. Kale, on the
other hand submits that the Committee consisting of responsible
officers and constituted as per Government Resolution has looked
into the grievance of the petitioner and there is no jurisdictional
error. He, therefore, contends that on technical grounds this Court
should not interfere.
3. With the assistance of respective counsel we have
perused the impugned order. The petitioner claimed to belong to
Schedule Tribe "Rajput Bhamta". She relied upon certain
documents and the Scrutiny Committee has looked into those
documents. Consideration by Scrutiny Committee reveals that it
J-wp3656.97.odt 3/4
has not taken assistance of any research officer and there was no
vigilance inquiry also. Thus, statements of elderly persons in the
family of petitioner have not been recorded.
4. The impugned order of Scrutiny Committee is after the
date of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned supra.
Even in the first judgment the Hon'ble Apex Court has pointed out
need of associating research officer and need of home inquiry. The
composition of Committee is obviously not as directed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court.
5. In State of Maharashtra from 23.5.2001 the Maharashtra
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta
Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special
Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance & Verification of)
Caste Certificates Act, (Act No. 23 of 2001) has come into force.
That Act contains the procedure for verification of such caste claim.
This Court has while admitting writ petition for final hearing on
17th December, 1997 granted interim relief and stayed the
impugned order. That interim order continuous to operate even
today.
6. In this situation interest of justice can be met with by
quashing the impugned order and by sending the matter back to the
J-wp3656.97.odt 4/4
Scrutiny Committee.
7. Accordingly, order dated 22.7.1997 passed by the
respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
8. The matter is placed back before that Committee for its
fresh consideration in accordance with law.
9. We direct the petitioner to appear before that Committee
on 4th May, 2016 and to abide by its further instructions in the
matter.
10. The respondent No.2 shall also issue a notice to
petitioner for procuring her presence on 4th May, 2016.
JUDGE JUDGE
okMksns
