Bombay High Court
Nitesh S/O Dadaji Dadmal vs The Collector, Gadchiroli And ... on 16 September, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 wp5880.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5880 OF 2015
Nitesh s/o Dadaji Dadmal, Member,
Gram Panchayat, Kadholi, aged
32 years, occupation : cultivation,
r/o Kadholi, Tahsil Kurkheda,
District Gadchiroli. ... Petitioner
- Versus -
1) The Collector, Gadchiroli, Office
at Complex Area, Gadchiroli,
Tahsil and District Gadchiroli.
2) Tahsildar, Kurkheda, Tahsil
Office, Kurkheda, District
Gadchiroli.
3) Block Development Officer,
Panchayat Samiti, Kurkheda,
Tahsil Kurkheda, District Gadchiroli.
4) Secretary, Gram Panchayat,
Kadholi, Office at Kadholi,
Tahsil Kurkheda, District Gadchiroli.
5) State of Maharashtra, through its
Secretary, Tribal Development
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
6) Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Gadchiroli, Nagpur, through
its Chairman, Committee for Scheduled
Tribe Claims, Office at near Zilla Parishad
Sankool, Complex Area, Gadchiroli,
Taluq and District Gadchiroli.
7) State Election Commissioner,
Maharashtra, Administrative Building,
in front of Mantralaya, Madam Cama
Road, Mumbai - 32. ... Respondents
_________
::: Uploaded on - 20/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2016 00:30:49 :::
2 wp5880.15
Shri P. Dhok, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri V.P. Maldhure, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1, 2,
5 and 6.
----------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 16, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. VASANTI A NAIK
, J.) :
Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith. The writ
petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the
learned Counsel for the parties.
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction against
the respondent Scrutiny Committee to decide his caste claim within a time
frame. The petitioner also seeks a direction against the Collector and
Tahsildar not to cancel his membership of Gram Panchayat for not
producing the caste validity certificate.
It is the case of the petitioner that though he is elected as a
member of the Gram Panchayat on a post earmarked for the Scheduled
Tribes and though his caste claim is pending before the Scrutiny
Committee, the Collector and the Tahsildar have threatened to cancel his
membership of the Gram Panchayat.
3 wp5880.15
Shri Maldhure, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent nos.1, 2, 5 and 6, 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.
Since the petitioner was not at fault in not producing the caste
validity certificate due to pendency of his caste claim before the Scrutiny
Committee, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Scrutiny
Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within a period of
fifteen months and with a direction to the Collector and the Tahsildar not
to cancel the membership of the petitioner of the Gram Panchayat till his
caste claim is decided.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
khj
4 wp5880.15
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this judgment uploaded is a true and correct
copy of the original signed judgment.
Uploaded by : Uploaded on :
Kamal H. Jeswani ig 20/9/2016
Private Secretary
