Vijay Rambhau Shrote,Nagpur vs The State Of Mah. & Another
2017 Latest Caselaw 676 Bom

   wp2344.00                                                                         1



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           NAGPUR BENCH

                    WRIT PETITION  NO.  2344   OF  2000


  Vijay s/o Rambhau Shrote,
  aged about 45 years, 
  occupation - Service, r/o
  Quarter No. B-10/1, Doctors'
  Colony, Ajni, Nagpur.                             ...   PETITIONER

                    Versus

  1. The State of Maharashtra,
     through the Secretary,
     Health Education & Drugs
     Department, Mantralaya,
     Mumbai 400 032.

  2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
     Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
     Nagpur.                                        ...   RESPONDENTS


  Ms. T. Khan, AGP for the respondents.
                    .....

                                CORAM :      B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
                                             MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

MARCH 10, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Shri V.V. Bhangde, learned counsel for the

petitioner has filed a pursis No. 438 of 2017, reporting no

instructions. Accordingly, we discharge Shri Bhangde, learned

counsel and his office.

2. We have heard Ms. Khan, learned AGP for the

respondents.

3. The order of Scrutiny Committee dated 07.10.1999

invalidating caste claim of the petitioner, as belonging to 'Halbi'

- Scheduled Tribe has been questioned in present matter. This

Court has issued Rule on 28.08.2001 and granted interim relief.

That interim relief continues to operate even today. The

petitioner was about 45 years old when the petition came to be

filed. He must have, therefore, superannuated by now.

4. A perusal of impugned order reveals that the

petitioner did not cooperate with the Scrutiny Committee, did

not attend hearing after Vigilance Cell found out old documents

of his father, uncle and cousin grand father. There, the caste

was mentioned as 'Koshti'. In view of these documents, the

caste claim has been invalidated.

5. The petitioner is born on 11.05.1955 and caste

certificate was issued to him on 11.08.1981 i.e. when he was

about 26 years old.

6. In these peculiar facts, when the petitioner has

already ceased to be in employment, though we uphold the

order of invalidation, in the light of Full Bench judgment of this

Court in the case of Arun Vishwanath Sonone vs. State of

Maharashtra & Ors., reported at 2015 (1) Mh. L.J. 457, we are

not inclined to disturb his service or benefits flowing therefrom.

We, however, declare that the petitioner or his family members

are not entitled to claim the status and benefits as 'Halbi' -

Scheduled Tribe, in view of the order of invalidation dated

07.10.1999.

7. With these clarifications, we dispose of the present

writ petition. Rule discharged. However, in the facts and

circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

           JUDGE                                                        JUDGE
                                               ******
  *GS.