Bombay High Court
Umesh Pratapsingh Rabade vs Shri Sant Gadge Baba Maharaj ... on 17 November, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
1711WP4924.16-Judgment 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4924 OF 2016
PETITIONER :- Umesh Pratapsingh Rabade, aged 24 years,
occ. Student of Shri Sant Gadge Baba
Maharaj College of Engineering, Shegaon,
r/o Taroda, Tq. Motala, District Buldhana.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1. Shri Sant Gajanan Maharaj College of
Engineering Shegaon, through its Principal,
ig Distt. Buldhana.
2. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University,
Amravati, through its Registrar.
3. The Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Ervin Chowk,
Amravati.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.R.S.Parsodkar, counsel for the petitioner.
Mrs.U.A.Patil, counsel for the respondent No.1.
Mr. J.B.Jaiswal, counsel for the respondent No.2.
Ms Tajwar Khan,Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent No.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 17.11.2016
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition
is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
1711WP4924.16-Judgment 2/3
2) By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction
against the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the
petitioner as early as possible. The petitioner has also sought a direction
against the respondent-University to declare the result of the petitioner
of B.E. final year examination.
3) According to the petitioner, though the caste claim of the
petitioner is referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification, the
Scrutiny Committee has not verified the same and the respondent-
University has not declared the result of the petitioner, as the petitioner
was admitted on a seat earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes and he had
not produced the caste validity certificate. It is stated that the petitioner
is not at fault in not producing the caste validity certificate, as the
Scrutiny Committee has not decided his caste claim.
4) Ms Khan, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the Scrutiny Committee, states on instructions that the
caste claim of the petitioner is pending before the Scrutiny Committee
and the same would be decided as early as possible. It is stated that
presently, the posts of Vigilance Officer are lying vacant in the Scrutiny
Committee at Amravati and hence, it is very difficult for the Scrutiny
Committee in the absence of adequate Vigilance Officers to decide the
caste claim of the claimants expeditiously. It is stated that reasonable
time may be granted to the Scrutiny Committee for deciding the caste
claim.
1711WP4924.16-Judgment 3/3
5) Mrs. Patil, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1-
College, states that the petitioner was admitted on a seat earmarked for
the Scheduled Tribes, but the petitioner has paid the fees that are liable
to be paid by the regular students, as the petitioner had not produced
the caste validity certificate.
6) In the circumstances of the case, since the caste claim of
the petitioner is pending for verification and since the result of the
petitioner of final year B.E. examination is declared in terms of our
interim orders, we partly allow the writ petition. The respondent-
Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the caste claim of the
petitioner within fifteen months. The petitioner undertakes to appear
before the Scrutiny Committee on 07/12/2016 so that issuance of
notice to the petitioner could be dispensed with. The education of the
petitioner would be protected provisionally till his caste claim is
decided. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
