Bombay High Court
Yogesh S/O Vitthal Nandanwar vs Vice-Chairman And Joint ... on 4 May, 2017
Bench: B.R. Gavai
973-J-WP-1961-17 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.1961 OF 2017
Yogesh s/o Vitthal Nandanwar
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Service,
R/O C/o Prabhakar A. Chandekar
Krushna Nagari, Bldg. No.3,
Plot No.105, Near Anand Nursing Home,
Kalyan, Mumbai ... Petitioner.
-vs-
1. Vice-chairman & Joint Commissioner,
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Adiwasi Vikas Bhavan, Giripeth, Nagpur.
2. Deputy Commissioner,
(Headquarter),
Thane Municipal Corporation,
Thane Distt. Mumbai. ... Respondents.
Shri S. R. Narnaware, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms Tajwar Khan, AGP for respondent No.1.
Shri N. S. Khandewale, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI &
A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : May 04, 2017
Oral Judgment : (Per B. R. Gavai, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of learned
counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the
973-J-WP-1961-17 2/3
communication dated 18/03/2017.
2. The petitioner was appointed by respondent No.2 as English
Stenographer against the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe on the basis of
his claim he belongs to Halba, Scheduled Caste. The papers were sent to
respondent No.1-Committee for verification. However, since the respondent
No.1-Committee did not decide the claim of the petitioner and since the
petitioner did not submit the validity certificate in time, the petitioner's
services came to be terminated vide the impugned order dated 18/03/2017.
3. It is not in the hands of the petitioner within how much time the
caste-claim of the petitioner be decided. It is clear that due to the fault of
respondent No.1, the petitioner cannot be punished. Reliance is placed on
the judgment in case of Sudhir Vasantrao Dhekhan vs. Joint Commissioner
and Vice Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Nagpur and ors. 2010(5) Mh.L.J. 353.
4. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the petition
and pass the following order.
(i) The impugned order dated 18/03/2017 is quashed and set aside.
(ii) Respondent No.2 is directed to reinstate the petitioner within
period of two weeks from today.
973-J-WP-1961-17 3/3
(iii) It is made clear that the petitioner would not be entitled for back-
wages for the period he was out of employment. However he
would be entitled to all other service benefits including continuity
for the said period.
(iv) It is further directed that respondent No.2 shall not terminate the
services of the petitioner for non-submission of his validity
certificate.
(v) It is further directed that respondent No.1-Scrutiny Committee
shall decide the claim of the petitioner as early as possible within
period of six months from today. In the event the decision of the
Scrutiny committee is adverse, the same shall not be given effect
for a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
communication thereof by the petitioner.
Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Asmita
