Sunil Ramlal Bhandopiya,Beed vs State Of Maharashtra And Anohter
2016 Latest Caselaw 780 Bom

     WP4076.00 [J].odt                             1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                               
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                       
                              WRIT PETITION NO.4076 OF 2000

     Sunil s/o Ramlal Bhandopiya,
     Aged about 40 years,




                                                      
     Occupation-Service,
     R/o. C/o. M.L. Sanap, 
     Near Social Welfare Office,
     Adarsh Ganesh Nagar, 




                                              
     Nagar Road, Beed.                                  ..             Petitioner
                              ig    .. Versus ..

     1]     The State of Maharashtra, through
                            
            the Secretary, Public Works Department,
            Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

     2]     The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
      


            Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur.           ..                   Respondents
   



                           ..........
     Shri S.N. Tapadiya, counsel holding for Shri V.V. Bhangde, counsel for 
     the petitioner,





     Shri N.R. Rode, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.
                           ..........

                                    CORAM :  SMT. VASANTI  A. NAIK  AND
                                             V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 21, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)

By this writ petition, the petitioner had initially challenged

the order of the Scrutiny Committee, dated 13.10.2000 invalidating the

claim of the petitioner of belonging to Thakur, Scheduled Tribe.

The petitioner has, however, given up his caste claim and has only

sought the protection of his services in view of the judgment of the Full

Bench, reported in 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457 (Arun Vishwanath Sonone .vs.

State of Maharashtra and others). The learned counsel for the petitioner

has sought leave to amend the prayer clause accordingly. We grant leave

to the petitioner to delete prayer clause (1) and substitute it by prayer

seeking protection of his services.

The petitioner was appointed on 22.12.1989 as an Assistant

Engineer in Grade-II category, on a post earmarked for the Scheduled

Tribes. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub-Divisional

Engineer on 11.8.1995, on the post earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes.

The caste claim of the petitioner was sent by the respondent-employer

to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The Scrutiny Committee has

invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by the impugned order

dated 13.10.2000.

Shri Tapadiya, the learned counsel holding for Shri V.V.

Bhangde, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that in view of the

judgment of the Full Bench, the petitioner seeks the protection of his

service as an Assistant Engineer, Grade-II i.e. the post on which he was

initially appointed. It is stated that the petitioner was appointed before

the cut off date in the year 1989 and there is no observation in the order

of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner has fraudulently secured

the benefits meant for the Thakur Scheduled Tribe. It is stated that the

caste claim of the petitioner was rejected only because the petitioner was

not able to prove the same on the basis of the documents and affinity

test. It is stated that both the conditions, that are required to be

satisfied, while seeking the protection of the services, in view of the

judgment of the Full Bench, stand satisfied in the case of the petitioner.

It is stated that since the petitioner was promoted on the basis of his

caste claim, the petitioner is not seeking the protection of his services on

the promotional post. The learned counsel states that the petitioner is

ready to furnish an undertaking that he would not claim the benefits

meant for the Thakur Scheduled Tribe, in future.

Shri Rode, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the respondents, does not dispute the position of

law, as laid down by the Full Bench. It is admitted that the petitioner

was appointed before the cut off date and that there is no observation in

the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner has fraudulently

secured the benefits meant for the Thakur Scheduled Tribe. It is stated

that an appropriate order may be passed in the circumstances of the

case.

On a perusal of the judgment of the Full Bench and the order

of the Scrutiny Committee, it appears that the services of the petitioner

are liable to be protected. The petitioner was appointed before the cut

off date in the year 1989 and there is no adverse observation against the

petitioner in the order of the Scrutiny Committee. The caste claim of

the petitioner appears to have been invalidated, as the petitioner could

not prove the same on the basis of the documents and affinity test.

Since both the conditions that are required to be satisfied

while granting the protection of services to the employees are satisfied in

this case, we direct the respondent no.1 to protect the services of the

petitioner on the post of Assistant Engineer, Grade-II (the post on which

he was initially appointed in the year 1989) on the condition that the

petitioner furnishes an undertaking in this Court and before the

respondent no.1 that neither the petitioner nor his progeny would claim

the benefits meant for the Thakur Scheduled Tribe, in future.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

                              JUDGE                                            JUDGE



     Gulande