Bombay High Court
Manoj Ramdas Kalane vs State Maharashtra Through Its ... on 3 May, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp.5846.13+
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
WRIT PETITION NO. 5846/2013
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.5847/2013
WRIT PETITION NO. 5846/2013
Manoj Ramdas Kalane
Aged about 47 years, occu: service as
Laboratory Attendant with respondent no.2
R/o 612-E, New Subhedar Layout
Udaynagar, Near NIT Garden
Nagpur-440 024. ..PETITIONER
v e r s u s
1) State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Tribal Welfare Department
Mantralaya,Mumbai-32.
2) President /Secretary
Shri Shivaji Shikshan Sanstha
Amravati, Dist.Amravati.
3) Head Mistress,
Shri Shivaji High School & Junior College
Azam Shah Layout, Ganeshnagar, Nagpur.
4) Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati Division
Amravati :Through its member Secretary. ...RESPONDENTS
wp.5846.13+
WRIT PETITION NO. 5847/2013
Anita Ramdas Kalane
Aged about 47 years, occu: service as
Assistant Teacher with respondent no.2
R/o 26-B, Radha Shriram Wadi
Ayodhya Nagar,
Nagpur- 440 024. ..PETITIONER
v e r s u s
1) State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Tribal Welfare Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2) President /Secretary
Shri Shivaji Shikshan Sanstha
Amravati, Dist.Amravati.
3) Head Master
Vidya Mandir High School & Junior College
Koradi, Vidyut Vihar, Koradi 441111.
4) Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati Division
Amravati: Through its Member Secretary. ...RESPONDENTS
...........................................................................................................................
Mr. Rohit Chandurkar, Advocate for the petitioner/s
Mrs.Geeta Tiwari,Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondent No.1
Shri A.Sambre, Advocate for Respondent No.2
Respondent no.3 served on merit
Shri Abhijit Deshpande, Advocate for respondent no.4
...........................................................................................................................
CORAM: SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK &
MRS . SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ
.
DATED : 3rd May, 2017
wp.5846.13+
ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
Since the issue involved in these Writ Petitions is identical and similar
prayers are made therein, they are heard together and are decided by this
common judgment.
By these Writ Petitions, the petitioners have sought the protection of
their services, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Kavita Solunke vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2012(5)
Mh.L.J. 921 and, in view of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
the case of Arun Sonone vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2015 (1)
Mh.L.J. 457.
The petitioners were appointed in the respondent-School as a
Laboratory Attendant and as a Science Teacher. The appointment of the
petitioners was made in the year 1998 and 1999 respectively, on the post
earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes. The services of the petitioners were
sought to be terminated by their respective employer for not producing the
validity certificate that they belong to the Scheduled Tribes. The petitioners
approached the Scrutiny Committee. However before the Scrutiny Committee
they gave up their claim of belonging to Scheduled Tribes and admitted that
they belong to the Special Backward Classes. The caste claim of the petitioners
of belonging to Scheduled Tribes was invalidated. By these petitions, the
petitioners have sought the protection of their services as they were appointed
wp.5846.13+
before the cut off date in the years 1998 and 1999 and there is no observation
in the order of the Scrutiny Committee that the petitioners had fraudulently
secured the benefits meant for the Scheduled Tribes.
Shri Chandurkar, the learned counsel for the petitioners relied on the
unreported judgment of this Court, dated 12th February 2015, in a bunch of
Writ Petitions, bearing Writ Petition No. 3729/2014 and others, to submit
that, in the decided cases, the employees were initially appointed on the post
earmarked for the Scheduled Tribes and subsequently they had given up their
claim of belonging to the Tribes and had claimed to belong to the Special
Backward Classes. It is stated that while allowing the Writ Petitions filed by the
petitioners that were similarly situated, like the petitioners in this case, this
Court had protected the services of the petitioners. It is submitted that in the
circumstances of the case, since the petitioners were granted interim relief
and they are continued in service during the pendency of the Writ Petitions,
their services need to be protected as they have given up their claim of
belonging to the Scheduled Tribes.
The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the
respondent no.1 does not dispute the position of law, as laid down by the
Full Bench, in the judgment reported in 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457 (supra) as
also the judgment dated 12th February, 2015 in the bunch of Writ Petitions
bearing Writ Petition No.3729/2014 and others. It is stated that an
wp.5846.13+
appropriate order may be passed in these petitions also.
On a reading of the judgment of the Full Bench and on a perusal of the
unreported judgment,dated 12th February 2015, in Writ Petition No.3729/2014
and others, it appears that the services of the petitioners need to be protected.
In almost identical set of facts, this Court had held that since the petitioners in
the decided Writ Petitions had subsequently given up their claim of belonging
to Scheduled Tribes and had claimed to belong to Special Backward Classes,
they would be entitled to the protection of their services. In these petitions, the
appointment of the petitioners as Laboratory Attendant and Science Teacher
is made before the cut off date in the years 1998 and 1999 and hence the
services of the petitioners need to be protected.
Hence, for the reasons recorded herein-above and also for the reasons
recorded in the judgment, dated 12.12.2015, in the bunch of Writ Petitions
bearing Writ Petition No.3729/2014 and others, both the Writ Petitions are
allowed and the respondents/employer are directed to protect the services of
the petitioners as Laboratory Attendant and Science Teacher, as is applicable
to them, only on the condition that the petitioners furnish an undertaking in
this Court and before the employer within six weeks that neither the
petitioners nor their progeny would seek the benefits meant for the Scheduled
Tribes, in future.
wp.5846.13+
The Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to
costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
