Bombay High Court
Pradeep Pandurang Kolhe vs State Of Maharashtra And Another on 1 August, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
wp.4006.02
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4006/2002
* Pradeep s/o Pandurang Kolhe
Aged about 42 years, occu: service
R/o Ganesh Colony, Amravati. ..PETITIONER.
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Irrigation Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
2) Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims
through its Chairman
Amravati. ..RESPONDENTS
.
...................................................................................................................
Mr. N.R.Saboo, Advocate for the petitioner
Mrs.Geeta Tiwari, Assistant Government Pleader for
respondent Nos.1 & 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 1 st
August, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per R.K.DESHPANDE, J.)
The petition challenges the order dated 26.8.2002 passed by
the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims at Amrvati
invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner for 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe
wp.4006.02
category. The petitioner was employed in the Department of Irrigation as
Junior Engineer on 12.4.1982 against a post reserved for Scheduled
Tribe category. Upon invalidation of caste claim, he apprehended the
termination from service and, therefore, approached this Court
challenging the order impugned. This Court has protected the service of
the petitioner by passing an order of status quo and subsequently
interim relief in terms of prayer cause (iii) staying the operation of the
order was continued.
2. We have gone through the order passed by the respondent
no.2-Committee. We find that the Committee has relied upon two
documents - one in the name of Vasudeo Tukaram in which the entry
dated 8.8.1946 was of 'Koshti' and the other of Ashok Tukaram in
which the entry dated 19.6.1953 was of 'Koshti'. The police vigilance
cell report described these two persons as real paternal uncles of the
candidate. Applying the affinity test, the Committee rejected the caste
claim and also about ten documents which were filed by the petitioner in
support of his claim 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe category.
3. During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner filed
wp.4006.02
Civil Application No.1691/2017 for amendment of the petition
introducing the plea that one of his blood relatives, namely, Bhaskar
Mahadeorao Kolhe was granted the validity certificate dated 5.12.2012
by the said Committee. We allow the said amendment application. The
amendment be carried out within a period of one week from today.
4. The petitioner denied the relationship with Vasudeo
Tukaram and Ashok Tukaram. The document i.e. certificate of validity is
produced on record in the name of Bhaskar Kolhe. The petitioner has to
establish the relationship with Bhaskar Kolhe. Similarly, the question
of the relationship of the petitioner with Vasudeo Tukaram and Ashok
Tukaram is also required to be gone into. Hence, we are of the view
that the matter will have to be remanded back to the Scrutiny
Committee for decision afresh after an enquiry.
5. In the result, we allow this writ petition, quash and set aside
the order dated 26.8.2002 passed by the respondent no.2- Committee.
The matter is remanded back to the said Committee for enquiry and
decision afresh. The petitioner to appear before the Committee on 28th
August, 2017. The Committee to conduct enquiry and decide the
wp.4006.02
matter within a period of eight months thereafter. The Committee shall
permit the petitioner to produce additional documents if any, on record
in support of the claim for Halba/Halbi Scheduled Tribe. If warranted,
the petitioner shall also be permitted to lead oral evidence in the matter.
6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
