Bombay High Court
Sweta Bhagawan Chaudhari vs The Scheduled Tribe Certificate ... on 14 September, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 149cp297.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
C.P. No.297 of 2016 in W.P. No.1146 of 2014 (D)
(Sweta Bhagwan Chaudhari .vs. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Gadchiroli and
Ors.)
with
C.P. No.298 of 2016 in W.P. No.1146 of 2014 (D)
(Pawan s/o. Baliram Shrirame .vs. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Gadchiroli
and Ors.)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mr.S.P.Khare, Adv. for the petitioners.
Mrs.Bharti Dangre, GP for respondents.
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI
AND
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 14th SEPTEMBER, 2016.
Heard.
The petitioners have approached this Court
contending therein that perusal of the roznama
dt.12.4.2016 depicts a total contemptuous attitude on
behalf of the respondents/contemnors.
Being aggrieved by rejection of Validity
Certificates, the petitioners, who were claiming to be
belonging to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe, had approached
this Court by way of Writ Petition Nos.1146 of 2014
and 2970 of 2014 respectively. It was specific
contention of the petitioner that the petitioner's case
was covered by the Judgment of the Division Bench of
2 149cp297.16.odt
this Court in the case of Apoorva d/o. Vinay Nichale
.vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee
No.1 and Others reported in 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 401
inasmuch as the father and brother of the petitioner
have been granted Validity Certificate.
When the matters were listed before this
Court on 18.3.2016, a statement was made by the
learned Government Pleader on the instructions of the
respondents, who were present in the Court today that
the orders impugned in the said petitions were being
withdrawn and the Validity Certificates would be
issued in favour of the petitioners within a period of
four weeks from the said date. We had, therefore,
disposed of the petitions in view of the statement made
by the learned Government Pleader and directed the
Committee to issue Validity Certificate within a period
of four weeks from the said date.
The roznama of the meeting dt.12.4.2016 is
placed on record which states that this Court in Writ
Petition Nos.1146 of 2014 and 2970 of 2014 have
issued a direction to the Committee to issue Validity
Certificate within a period of four weeks. It further
states that a letter is addressed to the learned
Government Pleader to prefer a Special Leave Petition
against the said Judgments and also to prefer review
application. It further states that the Validity
Certificates are being issued to the petitioners subject
to Special Leave Petition to be filed before Hon'ble
Apex Court.
3 149cp297.16.odt
We may state that a party is always at
liberty to challenge the order passed by this Court
before Hon'ble Apex Court. However, this would be so
when the order is passed on merits after considering
the rival submissions. When the order is passed on the
concession of the party, we fail to understand as to
how a Special Leave Petition could be preferred by the
party making a concession. Mrs.Bharti Dangre, learned
Government Pleader states that, as a matter of fact, the
Special Leave Petition is not preferred and the Validity
Certificates does not contain such a contention. She
submits that merely because there are discussions in
the internal file of the Committee, the same would not
amount to contempt.
We are of the considered view that the
contention raised by the learned Government Pleader
needs to be heard only to be rejected. The proceedings
of the Committee also cannot be in a manner which
would amount to contempt of this Court. When a party
has given a concession before this Court, it is bound to
abide by the said concession. The concessions are
given on their free will. Had the concession not been
given by the respondents through the learned
Government Pleader, the Court could have very well
decided the matter on its own merits. In that situation,
the matter would have been different.
We are of the considered view that the
aforesaid observations in the notings of the Committee
are totally contemptuous, which show scant regard to
4 149cp297.16.odt
the concession given by the members of the Committee
before this Court and to the proceedings of the Writ
Petition.
All the respondents are present in the Court.
They tender their unconditional apology.
Though we find that the members of the
Scrutiny Committee always take pride in disobeying the
directions given by this Court, we are inclined to take a
lenient view insofar as the present respondents are
concerned, since they state that they had joined the
Committee recently before the roznama was written
and were not aware about niceties of the procedure.
We, therefore, accept the unconditional
apology tendered by the respondents. We, however,
warn them that if, hereinafter, we come across such
notings in the file or such orders being passed which
are contemptuous in nature, we will be compelled to
take a serious view of the matter and take stern action.
The Contempt Petitions are disposed of with
the aforesaid observations.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
5 149cp297.16.odt
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Order.
Uploaded by : Jaiswal, P.S. Uploaded on : 19.9.2016.
