Bombay High Court
Jyoti Sadhurao Niralwad vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 14 March, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
Writ Petition No.2336/2000 with
Writ Petition No.2337/2000
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2336 OF 2000
Jyoti d/o Sadhurao Niralwad
Age 19 years, Occ. Student
R/o C/o P.G. Boinwad - Talathi
Shri Pailwad's Bungalow,
Opp. Janabai College, Gangakhed,
District Parbhani ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
(through the Govt. Pleader,
High Court Building,
at Aurangabad)
2. The Caste Certificate Verification
Committee, M.S., Nasik
3. The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Sailu, District Parbhani.
4. The Director of Medical Education
& Research, Mumbai
5. Swami Ramanand Teerth
Marathwada University,
Vishnupuri, Nanded,
through its Registrar
6. The Dean,
Govt. Medical College,
Ambajogai ... RESPONDENTS
.....
Shri A.S. Golegaonkar, Advocate for petitioner
Shri A.M. Phule, A.G.P. for State
.....
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:00:11 :::
Writ Petition No.2336/2000 with
Writ Petition No.2337/2000
2
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2337 OF 2000
Shivaji s/o Sadhurao Niralwad
Age 17 years (minor), Occ. Student
through his father and natural guardian
Sadhurao Ramrao Niralwad
R/o C/o P.G. Boinwad - Talathi
Shri Pailwad's Bungalow,
Opp. Janabai College, Gangakhed,
District Parbhani ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
(through the Govt. Pleader,
High Court Building,
at Aurangabad)
2. The Caste Certificate Verification
Committee, M.S., Nasik
3. The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Sailu, District Parbhani.
4. The Director of Technical Education
3, Mahanagarpalika Marg,
Mumbai.
5. The SGGS College of Engineering &
Technology, Nanded,
through its Registrar.
6. The Principal,
Mahatma Basweshwar Engineering
College, Ambajogai ... RESPONDENTS
.....
Shri A.S. Golegaonkar, Advocate for petitioner
Shri A.M. Phule, A.G.P. for State
.....
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:00:11 :::
Writ Petition No.2336/2000 with
Writ Petition No.2337/2000
3
CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND
A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.
DATED: 14th March, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.):
1. The tribe claim of the petitioners as belonging to Koli
Mahadeo - Scheduled Tribe has been invalidated. Aggrieved
thereby the present petitions.
2. Mr. Golegaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that, the father of the petitioners was issued validity
pursuant to the order passed by the appellate authority way back
in the year 1993. The Committee failed to consider the service
book of the petitioners' father, which records caste as Mahadeo
Koli. According to the learned counsel, school record of the
petitioners record their caste as Mahadeo Koli. Only one contra
evidence is considered by the respondent Committee i.e. the
school record of the petitioners' father recording caste as Koli.
The learned counsel submits that, subsequent to filing of present
petitions, three sisters of the petitioners have been issued
validity certificates. The learned counsel submits that,
observations of the Committee in the judgment with regard to
the area restriction is erroneous in view of the judgment of the
Writ Petition No.2336/2000 with
Writ Petition No.2337/2000
Apex Court in the case of R. Unnikrishnan & anr. Vs. V.K.
Mahanudevan & ors., reported in 2014 (4) SCC 434.
3. The learned A.G.P. submits that, the Committee has
considered contra evidence on record and has rightly passed the
judgment. The school record of the father of petitioners shows
caste being recorded as "Koli" only. There is interpolation in the
service book of petitioners' father. The word "Mahadeo" appears
in a different ink. All these aspects are rightly considered.
4. We have considered the submissions canvassed by
the learned counsel for respective parties. The petitioners have
sought to place on record the validity certificates said to have
been issued in favour of the sisters of the present petitioners.
They are also photo copies. It is also not on record as to what
was considered by the Committee while issuing validity
certificates in favour of the sisters of the petitioners. It is also
not clear as to whether the invalidation of the tribe claim of the
petitioners was brought to the notice of the Committee while
validating the tribe claim of the sisters of the petitioners
subsequently. It will be for the Committee to consider all these
relevant aspects of the matter. The Committee would have all
the documents with them and enquiry can be made in this
Writ Petition No.2336/2000 with
Writ Petition No.2337/2000
regard.
5. Considering the above, we feel it appropriate to
relegate the petitioners before the Committee. In the result, we
pass the following order:
6. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The
petitioners are relegated before the Committee. The petitioners
shall appear before the Committee on 11th April 2016. The
petitioners may place on record the validity certificates issued in
favour of the sisters of the petitioners. The Committee shall
consider the said certificates and the record submitted while
obtaining the validity certificates in favour of sisters of the
petitioners and decide the case of the present petitioners on its
own merits in accordance with law expeditiously, considering the
fact that the matter is remitted back.
7. Writ Petition accordingly disposed of. Rule
accordingly disposed of. No costs.
(A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
