Nanaji Kisan Sherpure vs Chief Executive Officer & Another
2016 Latest Caselaw 907 Bom

                                                           1                        wp4423.03

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                         
                               NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                
                        WRIT PETITION NO.4423 OF 2003
    Nanaji s/o Kisan Sherpure,




                                                               
    aged 47 years, occupation :
    service, r/o Sironcha,
    District Gadchiroli.                                       ...            Petitioner




                                                    
                     - Versus -

    1) Chief Executive Officer,
       Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli.
                                 
                                
    2) Block Development Officer,
       Panchayat Samiti, Sironcha,
       District Gadchiroli.                                    ...           Respondents
      

                                       -----------------
    Shri Bobde, Advocate h/f Shri R.S. Parsodkar, Advocate
   



    for petitioner.
                                       ----------------





                                              CORAM :    B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND 
                                                                   P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 23, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) :

Heard Adv. Bobde for petitioner. Ms. Rane,

learned Assistant Government Pleader present in the

Court has assisted in the matter.

                                                  2                          wp4423.03

    2)               Challenge is to the order of reversion dated




                                                                                 

31/10/2003 issued by respondent no.1. Adv. Bobde

submits that petitioner cannot be reverted till his caste

claim is not invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee. He

points out that caste claim of the petitioner is still

under consideration of the Scrutiny Committee.

    3)               Ms.
                                 
                               Rane,   learned       Assistant      Government

Pleader points out that Caste Scrutiny Committee is not

party before this Court. She further submits that this

Court has already granted interim relief on 17/11/2003.

4) In this situation, we find that interest of

petitioner can be met with by directing respondent

nos.1 and 2 not to revert petitioner during pendency of

his caste claim before competent Scrutiny Committee.

If caste claim of the petitioner is already

invalidated, this order shall not operate.

If caste claim of the petitioner is not forwarded

to the Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner shall submit

necessary documents to his employer within four

3 wp4423.03

weeks from today and respondent no.1 shall thereafter

submit the same to competent Scrutiny Committee in

next four weeks. The Scrutiny Committee shall

thereafter attempt to complete verification in

accordance with The Maharashtra Scheduled Caste,

Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis),

Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special

Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and

Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (Act No. XXIII

of 2001) in next one year.

The interim orders passed by this Court

protecting petitioner shall continue to operate till then

and cease to operate automatically thereafter.

    5)               The       petition    is   thus   partly     allowed          and

    disposed of.              No costs.





                       JUDGE                                              JUDGE

    khj