Sou. Mayadevi Shyamlal Lodh vs State Of Mah. Thru. Its Secty. & 3 ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 5381 Bom

                                1
                                                           wp728.08.odt

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


                   Writ Petition No.728 of 2008


  Sou. Mayadevi w/o Shyamlal Lodh,
  Aged about 36 years,
  Occupation - Chairman of Balapur
  Panchayat Samiti,
  R/o Wadegaon,
  Tq. Balapur, District Akola.                    ... Petitioner


       Versus


  1. State of Maharashtra,
     through its Secretary,
     Department of Tribal Welfare,
     Mantralaya,
     Mumbai-400 032.

  2. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
     Committee (For Scheduled Castes/
     Vimukta Jati Nomadic Tribes/
     Other Backward Classes/Special 
     Backward Categories),
     Amravati Division,
     Amravati.

  3. Collector, Akola.

  4. Chief Executive Officer,
     Zilla Parishad,
     Akola.                                       ...  Respondents




::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2017                  ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2017 00:28:47 :::
                                    2
                                                                   wp728.08.odt


  None for Petitioner.
  Ms Geeta Tiwari, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent 
  Nos.1 to 3.

                Coram : R.K. Deshpande & Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.

st Dated : 1 August, 2017

Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :

1. The petitioner was elected for the post of Chairman,

Panchayat Samiti, which was reserved for a woman candidate

belonging to OBC/ VJNT category. The petitioner claimed that

she belongs to 'Ahir', Vimukta Jati category. The caste claim of

the petitioner was scrutinized by the Divisional Caste Scrutiny

Committee, Amravati and the certificate produced by the

petitioner, issued by the Tahsil Office on 25-8-1993, has been

held to be invalid. Hence, the petitioner has filed this petition

challenging the order of the Scrutiny Committee.

2. The petitioner was elected sometime in the year 2006

and her tenure in the office has expired. Only two documents

were produced by the petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee -

wp728.08.odt

one was school leaving certificate in the name of the petitioner,

in which the caste was shown as 'Rajput', and another was the

school leaving certificate in the name of the father of the

petitioner showing the caste as 'Ahir'. The Committee has

examined the documents and taken a possible view of the matter

that the petitioner has failed to establish the caste claim for

'Ahir', Vimukta Jati category. We do not find any perversity in

recording such findings.

3. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Rule stands

discharged. No order as to costs.

                             JUDGE.                                   JUDGE.

   Lanjewar