Bombay High Court
Parag Prabhu Wankhede vs Committee For Scrutiny & Veri. & ... on 29 June, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1
wp2505.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.2505 of 2002
Parag s/o Prabhu Wankhede,
Aged about 27 years,
Resident of Karanja (Lad),
Tahsil - Karanja (Lad),
District - Washim. ... Petitioner
Versus
1. Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims,
through its Dy. Director,
Irvin Chowk, Amravati.
2. Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad,
Washim, Distt. Washim.
3. Zilla Parishad, Akola,
through its Chief Executive
Officer. ... Respondents
Shri N.R. Saboo, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri V.P. Maldhure, Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondent No.1.
Ms S.R. Gaikee, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2017 00:35:25 :::
2
wp2505.02.odt
Coram : R.K. Deshpande & Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.
th
Dated : 29
June, 2017
Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :
1. The challenge in this petition is to the order
dated 16-4-2002 passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims, Amravati. The petitioner-Parag
Prabhu Wankhede claims that he belongs to Thakur (Scheduled
Tribe) and the certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate,
Karanja to that effect has been invalidated by the impugned
order passed by the Committee.
2. Shri Saboo, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, has taken us through the documents, i.e. School
Leaving Certificate dated 11-9-2000 in respect of Prabhu
Pandurang, said to be the father of the petitioner, showing the
tribe as Thakur; School Leaving Certificate dated 22-8-1961 in
the name of Pandurang Rajaram, said to be the grandfather of
the petitioner, in which the tribe Thakur is shown; and the entry
in Kotwal Register in respect of birth and death made on 18-12-
wp2505.02.odt
1937, showing the tribe Thakur of the said Pandurang Rajaram.
Several such documents are placed on record pertaining to the
period prior to the issuance of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe)
Order, 1950.
3. After going through the entire record, we find that the
documents relied on by the petitioner do not indicate the
surname as 'Wankhede' and there is absolutely no enquiry made
on the aspect of relationship of the petitioner with the persons in
whose names the documents have been issued. This is the vital
enquiry, which is required to be made through the Police
Vigilance Cell. We have, therefore, no hesitation to set aside the
order passed by the Scrutiny Committee on this sole ground with
a direction to conduct the enquiry afresh without going into all
other aspects of the matter.
4. In the result, the petition is allowed. The order
dated 16-4-2002 passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims, Amravati, is hereby quashed and set
wp2505.02.odt
aside. The matter is remitted back to the said Committee for
decision afresh in accordance with law. The petitioner shall be
permitted to file the additional documents on record, in respect
of which also the enquiry be done through the Police Vigilance
Cell, and after following the procedure prescribed by the law, the
claim shall be decided within a period of eight months from the
date of first appearance of the petitioner before the Committee.
The petitioner to appear before the Committee on 17-7-2017.
5. The service of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in Zilla
Parishad, Akola has been protected by this Court by an interim
order passed on 18-9-2002. The said protection shall continue to
operate till the expiry of fifteen days' period from the date of
communication of the order of the Scrutiny Committee to the
petitioner.
6. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to
costs.
wp2505.02.odt
7. Civil Application (W) No.118 of 2016 for amendment
does not at all survive and the same stands disposed of as such.
JUDGE. JUDGE.
Lanjewar
