Bombay High Court
Ku. Asha Shivnarayansingh Tomar ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 3 May, 2017
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 wp2690.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.2690 OF 2017
Ku. Asha Shivnarayansingh Tomar
[Dr. (Mrs.) Asha w/o. Anil Tiwari],
aged about 56 years, Occ. Service
as Associate Professor in LAD
College for Womens, r/o. Plot No.2,
Shastri Layout, Jaitala Road,
Subhash Nagar, Nagpur.
.. PETITIONER
.. Versus ..
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary, Ministry
of Tribal Welfare and Social
Justice, Mantralaya,
Mumbai-400 032.
2. Principal,
LAD and Smt. R.P.College
for Women of Arts, Commerce
and Science and Smt.Rani Devi
Purohit College of Home Science
and Home Science Technology,
Shankar Nagar, Nagpur-440 010.
3. Women Education Society,
registered under the Societies
Registration Act having Registration
No.F/389(N), Shankar Nagar,
Nagpur-440 010, through its
Secretary. .. RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________________
Mr.N.C.Phadnis, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr.A.A.Madiwale, AGP for Respondent No.1.
Mr.A.A.Naik, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
___________________________________________________________________
::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/05/2017 00:22:28 :::
2 wp2690.17.odt
CORAM : B.R. Gavai &
A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATED : MAY 03, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R.Gavai, J. )
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court praying for a
limited relief for protection of her services in view of the Judgment
of Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Arun s/o Vishwanath
Sonone vs. State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary,
Department of Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 and Ors.
reported in 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457.
3. The petitioner claims to have been appointed as a
Lecturer in respondent no.2/College maintained by respondent no.3
against a post reserved for Vimukta Jati candidate on the basis of
her claim of belonging to 'Rajput Bhamta' caste. On the basis of
qualification and merit, she received various promotions and at the
moment, she is holding the post of Associate Professor.
4. The petitioner has been continuously serving since the
year 1985. However, In the meantime, the petitioner's claim of
belonging to Vimukta Jati came to be invalidated. Hence, the
petitioner has approached this Court. The petitioner does not wish
3 wp2690.17.odt
to press the claim of belonging to Vimukta Jati and only restricts
the claim in the petition for protection of her services on the basis
of the Judgment of Larger Bench of this Court in the case of of Arun
s/o. Vishwanath Sonone (supra).
5. Perusal of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee
shows that there is no finding of fraud against the petitioner.
Mr.A.A.Naik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent
nos. 2 and 3 fairly states that the petitioner is a meritorious
employee and throughout has exemplary academic record and is
an asset to the institution.
6. In view of these peculiar facts and circumstances and in
view of the law laid down by the Larger Bench of this Court in the
case of Arun s/o. Vishwanath Sonone (supra), we find that the
petitioner deserves protection, as prayed for.
7. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer
clauses (A) and (B) of the Writ Petition. The petitioner shall file an
undertaking before this Court within a period of one week from
today that in future neither she or her progeny would claim any
benefit of belonging to Vimukta Jati.
No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
jaiswal
