Devendra S/O Madan Mahadule vs The Divisional Caste Certificate ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8905 Bom

                                       1                      WP-4670-17.odt         



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

                         Writ Petition No.4670 of 2017


Devendra s/o Madan Mahadule
Aged about 18 years, Occ. Education,
R/o Nisatkheda, Post Chacher,
Tq. Mauda, Dist. Nagpur.                           ..             PETITIONER


                               .. Versus ..

1. The Divisional Caste Certificate
    Scrutiny Committee No.3,
    Nagpur Division, Nagpur,
    Administative Building No.2,
    3rd Floor, Opp. Zilla Parishad,
    Civil Lines, Nagpur 440001,
   Through its Member Secretary.

2. Shri Ramdev Baba College of
   Engineering and Management Nagpur.
   Through its Principal, Ramdev Tekadi,
   Gittikhadan, Katol Road,
   Nagpur 440013
                                         ..                      RESPONDENTS


Mr. P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr.M.A. Kadu, AGP for Respondent No.1.
                    ...

              CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & MRS. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : NOVEMBER 21, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (per B.R. Gavai, J. )

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court being

aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent no.1 in not

2 WP-4670-17.odt

deciding the claim of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner claims to be belonging to Nomadic Tribe,

has been admitted to respondent no.2 College against a seat

reserved for Nomadic Tribe. However, since the petitioner's claim

is not decided by respondent no.1, the petitioner is apprehending

an adverse action by respondent no.2 on the ground of non-

submission of validity certificate.

4. It is not in the hands of a candidate as to within how

much period the respondent- Caste Scrutiny Committee would

decide the claim of a candidate.

5. In that view of the matter, the petition is allowed in the

following terms:-

Respondent No.1 is directed to decide the claim of the

petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a

period of three months from today. It is further directed that until

the decision by respondent no.1 on the claim of the petitioner and

for further period of three weeks thereafter in the event the order

passed by respondent no.1 is adverse to the interest of the

petitioner, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner.

6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

(Mrs. Swapna S. Joshi, J. ) (B.R. Gavai, J.) ...

halwai/p.s.