Anant Namdev Mantre vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8776 Bom

                                   1                               wp 13398.17

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                    WRIT PETITION NO. 13398 OF 2017

          Anant Namdev Mantre,
          Age: 25 Years, Occu.: Service,
          R/o.: Pahadi Pargaon, Tq.: Dharur,
          Dist.: Beed                                   ..    Petitioner

                   Versus

 1.       The State of Maharashtra,
          Through Secretary to Tribal Development
          Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai

 2.       The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
          Verification Committee, Aurangabad,
          Through its Deputy Director [R],
          Aurangabad

 3.       The Divisional Forest Officer,
          Opp. Mehata petrol Pump,
          Markandi-Chiplun, Tq.: Chiplun,
          Dist.: Ratnagiri

 4.       The Range Forest Officer,
          Forest Office, Nursery Road, Dapoli,
          Dist.: Ratnagiri                              ..  Respondents

 Shri Sunil M. Vibhute, Advocate for the Petitioner.
 Shri S. G. Karlekar, A.G.P. for the Respondents.

                               CORAM  : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                        S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.
                               DATE     :  16    November, 2017
                                              th




::: Uploaded on - 18/11/2017                   ::: Downloaded on - 19/11/2017 01:36:11 :::
                                    2                                   wp 13398.17

 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :

 1.       Rule.     Rule   returnable   forthwith.     With   the   consent   of
 parties taken up for final hearing.


 2.       Mr.   Vibhute,   learned   counsel   submits   that   validation
 proceeding   in   respect   of   the   tribe   claim   of   the   petitioner   is
 pending   with   the   committee.     Earlier   it   was   rejected   on   the
 technical   ground.     Thereafter   it   has   been   resubmitted   on
 18.8.2017 and the same is pending.   The respondent - employer
 has issued notice to the petitioner to submit the validity within 7
 days or else the services of the petitioner would be terminated.


 3.       We have heard the learned A.G.P.  also.


 4.       Considering   the   fact   that   validation   proceeding   is   still
 pending, we pass the following order.
                                    ORDER

I] The impugned notice is quashed and set aside.

II] The committee shall decide the validation proceeding in respect of the tribe claim of the petitioner expeditiously and preferably within one year.

III] The petitioner shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the said proceeding.

                                    3                                  wp 13398.17

          IV]     The   respondent   employer   shall   not   take   adverse

action against the petitioner only on the ground that validation proceeding is pending.

V] The respondent - employer can take further course of action depending upon the judgment that will be delivered by the committee in the validation proceeding.

5. Rule according made absolute in above terms. No costs.

[S. M. GAVHANE, J. ] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

marathe/Nov.17