Kisan Dayaram Khadsan vs State Of Maharashtra & 4 Others
2017 Latest Caselaw 1818 Bom

                                                               1                                         WP.3214.00.odt

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                                WRIT PETITION NO. 3214 OF 2000.


     Kisan s/o Dayaram Khadsan, 
     aged about 52 years, Occ. Service,
     Resident of Kawasa, Tah. Akot, 
     District Akola.                 ......                            PETITIONER.

                      ....Versus....

     1]  The State of Maharashtra,
         through its Secretary, Department
         of Tribal Development, Mantralaya,
         Bombay - 32,

     2] The Chairman, Committee for
        Scrutiny of Tribes and
        Verification of Tribes Claims,
        Giripeth, Amravati Road,
        Nagpur,

     3] Divisional Controller, 
        Maharashtra State Road
        Transport Corporation,
        Division Pune, Pune. 

     4] Deputy Manager, 
        Maharashtra State Road
        Transport Corporation,
        Pimpri Chichwad, 
        district Pune.

     5] The Executive Magistrate,
        Akola.                                               .....                         RESPONDENTS.

     Mr. S.G. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner,
     Mr.   Nitin   Rode,   Assistant   Government   Pleader   for   the   respondent
     nos. 1, 2 & 5,
     Mr. V.G. Wankhede, Advocate for respondent nos 3 & 4.



::: Uploaded on - 19/04/2017                                            ::: Downloaded on - 21/04/2017 00:42:35 :::
                                                                2                                         WP.3214.00.odt

                                 CORAM :  B.R. GAVAI & A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

DATED : APRIL 18, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

1] Civil Application (C.A.W.) No. 727 of 2017 has been filed

by the petitioner seeking disposal of the Writ Petition on the ground

that the petitioner does not desire to prosecute his caste claim and

would be satisfied if his services are protected. Hence, the Writ

Petition is taken up for final disposal.

2] The petitioner claims to belong to Mahadeo Koli -

Scheduled Tribe. He was appointed as a Conductor with the

respondent no.2 in the year 1995. His caste certificate was sent for

verification and by the order dated 22.3.2000, the Scrutiny Committee

invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the

present Writ Petition has been filed.

3] Mr. S.G. Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits

on instructions that the petitioner does not desire to prosecute his

caste claim. He states, however, that the impugned order came to be

passed by the Scrutiny Committee without grant of proper

opportunity. He states that on 10.1.2000 a notice was issued to the

3 WP.3214.00.odt

petitioner to remain present before the Scrutiny Committee on

27.1.2000. This notice was received by the petitioner on 26.1.2000

due to which he could not remain present before the Scrutiny

Committee. He submits that in the order passed by the Scrutiny

Committee there is no observation made that the documents relied

upon by the petitioner were obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.

He then submits that on 15.11.2010 the petitioner has been issued a

validity certificate of belonging to Koli Special Backward Class. The

petitioner, therefore, submits that as per the judgment of the Full

Bench in Arun s/o Vishwanath Sonone .vs. State of Maharashtra

and others reported in 2015(I) Mh. L.J. 457 dated 22.12.2014, his

services deserve to be protected.

4] Mr. V.G. Wankhede, learned Counsel for respondent nos 3

& 4, on the other hand, submitted that despite sufficient opportunity,

the petitioner remained absent and did not appear before the Scrutiny

Committee. According to him, the report of the Vigilance Cell

indicates that the entry Koli is found in the old documents.

5] It is to be noted that in paragraph no. 4 of the Writ Petition

it has been specifically averred that the petitioner was served with a

notice one day prior to hearing of the proceedings. There is no

4 WP.3214.00.odt

affidavit filed on record controverting this assertion. The perusal of

the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee does not indicate that

the documents submitted by the petitioner were stated to be obtained

by fraud or misrepresentation. Considering the fact that the

petitioner is in service since the year 1995 and presently he has been

issued a validity certificate of belonging to Koli Special Backward

Class, we are inclined to protect the services of the petitioner by

relying upon the judgment of the Full Bench.

6] Accordingly, it is held that the services of the petitioner

would stand protected. The petitioner shall be treated as a candidate

belonging to Koli Special Backward Class and shall be treated as

such.

7] The Writ Petition is disposed of by making Rule absolute in

the aforesaid terms. There will be no order as to costs.

The Civil Application (CAW) No. 727/17 stands disposed

of accordingly.

                     JUDGE.                                                              J
                                                                                           UDGE.
    J.