Ku. Pallavi D/O Narendra ... vs Regional Caste Scrutiny ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8612 Bom

                                                   1                                        jg.wp.6272.11.odt


                 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 6272 OF 2011

Ku. Pallavi d/o Narendra Pusadekar, 
Age 17 years, [Minor], Occu. : Student,
Permanent r/o Wadner-Bhujang, 
Post : Kakda, Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati, 
Through her natural guardian mother, 
Smt. Pramila wd/o Narendra Pusadekar.                      ... Petitioner

             VERSUS

(1) Regional Caste Scrutiny Committee, 
      Amravati Region, Amravati
      Raghunandan Terminals, 
      Opposite Government Polytechnique, 
      Gadge Nagar, Amravati, 
      Tq. & Dist. Amravati. 

(2) Modern Education Society's College
      of Engineering, 
      19, Bund Garden, V. K. Jog Path, 
      Wadiya College Campus, Pune. 
      Through its Principal.                                                               ... Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Pradeep Mahalle, Advocate for the petitioner 
Shri S. S. Doifode Assistant Government Pleader for the State/ 
respondent no. 1 
None for the respondent no. 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  CORAM :  R. K. DESHPANDE AND
                                                                 M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATE : 10-11-2017

Oral Judgment (Per : R. K. Deshpande, J)

The claim of the petitioner for 'Bhope' Nomadic Tribes-B

2 jg.wp.6272.11.odt

category of backward class has been rejected by the Divisional Caste

Scrutiny Committee at Amravati by order dated 9-12-2011, which is the

subject matter of challenge in this petition.

2. The petitioner produced before the Committee, the caste

validity certificate issued on 25-2-2011 in the name of his real uncle

Shri Rajendrakumar Krushnarao Pusadekar validating his claim as

'Bhope', Nomadic Tribe-B category. The committee has commented

upon it saying that it is possible that such certificate might have been

obtained by illegal means or by producing false documents. It further

holds that validity certificate granted by one committee is not binding

upon the another committee and it is always open to examine the facts

and circumstances of each case and if it has not satisfied with the

validity of the claim, to reject it.

3. We need not go into the other aspects of the matter dealt

with by the committee, as in our view, the committee is bound by the

the declaration of the claim for Nomadic Tribe-B category of the uncle

Rajendra Krushnarao Pusadekar by it on 25-2-2011. The petitioner has

also produced before us the validity certificate issued by the Committee

No. 1 at Amravati on 19-11-2016 in the name of Shri Pradip Krishnaro

3 jg.wp.6272.11.odt

Pusdekar validating claim for Nomadic Tribes-B category. It is not the

finding of the committee in respect of validity certificate issued to

Rajendra Pusadekar, that it was obtained by fraudulent means or by

producing false documents. We also do not find any point to remand

the matter back to the Committee, to consider the validity certificate

issued in the name of another uncle Shri Pradip Krishnarao Pusdekar

and the cousin brother of the petitioner, Shri Ketankumar Pradiprao

Pusdekar.

4. In the decision of Division Bench of this Court in Apoorva

d/o Vinary Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny

Committee No. 1 and ors. reported in 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401, it is held

in paragraph 7 that :

7. We thus come to the conclusion that when during the course of enquiry the candidate submits a caste validity certificate granted earlier certifying that a blood relation of the candidate belongs to the same caste as that claimed by the applicant, the committee may grant such certificate without calling for Vigilance Cell Report. However, if the committee finds that the earlier caste certificate is tainted by fraud or is granted without jurisdiction, the Committee may refuse to follow and may refuse to grant certificate to the applicant before it.

In paragraph 9 of the said decision, the Court has held that merely

4 jg.wp.6272.11.odt

different view on the same facts would not entitle the committee

dealing with the subsequent caste claim, to reject it. This decision of the

Division Bench of this Court has been followed in several subsequent

such decisions and it is not necessary to cite such decisions referred to

by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. In the absence of any finding that the caste validity

certificate dated 25-2-2011 issued to Shri Rajendrakumar Pusadekar

being obtained by fraud or by producing false documents, the

consistency in the view taken by the committee has to be maintained.

Another committee cannot, therefore, take a different view of the matter

and will have to follow the said decision.

6. In the result, we allow this writ petition and quash and set

aside order dated 9-12-2011 passed by the Divisional Caste Scrutiny

Committee, Amravati invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner for

'Bhope', Nomadic Tribes-B category and we hold that the petitioner has

established her claim for grant of validity certificate. We therefore

direct the respondent Committee to issue caste validity certificate in the

name of the petitioner showing that she belongs to 'Bhope', Nomadic

Tribes-B during the period of one month from the date of production of

5 jg.wp.6272.11.odt

copy of this judgment to it.

7. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

                        JUDGE                                   JUDGE



wasnik