Thursday, 30, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ashok S/O. Manikrao Sontakke vs Chief Executive Officer Zilla ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 5611 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 5611 Bom
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2016

Bombay High Court
Ashok S/O. Manikrao Sontakke vs Chief Executive Officer Zilla ... on 27 September, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
                                                      1                                                                   WP.2546.16


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,




                                                                                                              
                                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                                                
                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 2546 OF 2016




                                                                               
     Ashok s/o Manikrao Sontakke,
     aged about 52 years, Occupation - 
     Service, R/o Plot No. 76, Khan
     Layout, Near Collector Colony,




                                                            
     Godhani Railway, Nagpur-440023.                            ...    PETITIONERS.
                                                                                         
                 VERSUS
                                   
     1)  The Chief Executive Officer,
                                  
           Zilla Parishad, Nagpur,

     2)   District Health Officer,
           Zilla Parishad, Nagpur,
      


     3)   Vithal s/o Gopalrao Kodape,
           Aged : Adult, Occ. Service,
   



           R/o P.H.C. Dorli, Tq. Parshioni,
           District Nagpur.                                                               ...    RESPONDENTS.





     Mr. S.U. Nemade, Advocate for the Petitioner.
     Mr. V.D. Raut,  A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
             





                               CORAM :  B.R. GAVAI & V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.     

DATED : SEPTEMBER 27, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.R.GAVAI, J).

1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned

Counsel for the parties finally by consent.

                                                       2                                                                   WP.2546.16


     2]                 The petitioner by way of the present petition has impugned




                                                                                                              

the communication dated 16.4.2016 vide which the petitioner has been

informed that the promotion granted to him as Health Assistant on

2.7.1997 is illegal and, therefore, he is reverted to the post of Health

Worker and protection is granted to his service.

3] The petitioner came to be appointed as Health Worker in the

year 1989. The petitioner was granted promotion in the year 1997. It

appears from the communication addressed at Annexure 'A' that

according to the respondents the promotion granted to the petitioner

was in the category of Scheduled Tribe and since he had not submitted

the validity certificate certifying him to be belonging to Scheduled Tribe

but had submitted a certificate certifying to be belonging to N.T. (B), he

was only entitled to protection of his service and not the promotion.

4] We find that the ground as raised by the respondent Zilla

Parishad is totally incorrect. No doubt that in the seniority list published

as on 1.1.1997 the petitioner is shown as Scheduled Tribe. His Tribe is

shown to be Gond (Gowari). However, it could be seen that in the

subsequent seniority list published on 1.1.2010 the petitioner's caste is

shown as Gadi Lohar and the category shown as N.T. - B. We have

3 WP.2546.16

perused the original service book of the petitioner. The perusal of the

service book would reveal that the entries made in the said service book

have been verified by the Competent Officer. The perusal of the said

service book would reveal that the caste of the petitioner is shown as

Gadi Lohar. It further appears that the same is also duly verified by the

Competent Officer. Not only that, but the petitioner is also having a

validity certificate issued to him certifying him to be belonging to

Nomadic Tribe-B. We find that an apparent error was committed by the

Zilla Parishad in treating the petitioner as Scheduled Tribe. As a matter

of fact, the Govaris are not entitled to be treated as Scheduled Tribe.

The entry with regard to Gadi Lohar can be found in the list of N.T. - B.

5] On a pertinent query as to whether the petitioner had applied

against a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe, the learned Counsel fairly

conceded that the record pertaining to his appointment is not available

with the Zilla Parishad. In that view of the matter, we will have to go

only as per the entry recorded in the service book at the time of the

entry of the petitioner in the service. The said entry clearly shows the

caste of the petitioner as Gadi Lohar.




     6]                 In that view of the matter, we find that the impugned order is





                                                       4                                                                   WP.2546.16


not sustainable in law. The petition deserves to be allowed. Rule is,

therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i). Needless to

state that the salary of the petitioner would be paid regularly from the

month of October and the arrears shall be cleared within a period of one

month from today. No order as to costs.

J.

                              JUDGE                                                     JUDGE
                                  
      
   







                                                       5                                                                   WP.2546.16




                                                                                                              
                                                  C E R T I F I C A T E

"I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and

correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order".

Uploaded by : Ki. Jeswani, Uploaded on : 30.9.2016.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter