Sangita Ramesh Muttepod vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7099 Bom

                                    1                             wp 11187.17

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    WRIT PETITION NO. 11187 OF 2017

          Sangita s/o Ramesh Muttepod,
          Age : 27 years, Occ: Nil,
          R/o: At Post: Sagroli,
          Taluka: Biloli, Dist. Nanded                ..    Petitioner

                   Versus

 1.       The State of Maharashtra
          Through its Secretary,
          Tribal Development Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai 32

 2.       The Committee for Scrutiny and
          verification of Tribe claims
          through its Dy. Director (Research),
          Aurangabad

 3.       The Sub Divisional Officer
          Biloli, Taluka Biloli,
          District  Nanded                            ..   Respondents


 Shri Arun H. Koralkar,  Advocate for the Petitioner.
 Mrs. A. V. Gondhalekar, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

                           CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
                                    MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2017.

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

 .        Heard.





                                     2                                  wp 11187.17

2. Rule. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken-up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

3. This petition is taking exception to the decision rendered by the Scrutiny Committee, directing invalidation of Tribe Certificate issued to the petitioner as belonging to Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe on technical ground of occurrence of spelling mistake in recording name of the Tribe in the Certificate issued to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor on 27.04.2011.

4. The issue raised in the instant matter is no more resintegra and is covered by the decision rendered in Writ petition No. 6263 of 2017 and other companion matters. For the reasons recorded in the Judgment referred to above, the instant petition also deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.

5. The order impugned in this petition stands quashed and set aside. The Scrutiny Committee is directed to return the original Tribe Certificate produced by the petitioner before it, within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall tender an undertaking to the Scrutiny Committee that he would approach the concerned competent authority for ratifying the spelling mistake occurred in recording name of the Tribe and shall produce corrected certificate within a period of eight weeks from

3 wp 11187.17

the date of receipt of the original certificate. The petitioner shall approach the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor for recording corrections in the certificate already issued to him. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor shall issue corrected certificate within a period of four weeks from the date of approach of the petitioner, without embarking upon further enquiry in the matter. On receipt of corrected Certificate, same shall be produced before the Scrutiny Committee within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt. The Scrutiny Committee shall thereafter proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner for validation of the Tribe Certificate and render decision on the proposal within a period of one year from the date of receipt of corrected Certificate together with the proposal. It would be open for the petitioner to tender the corrected Certificate and the proposal directly to the Scrutiny Committee and the Scrutiny Committee shall entertain the same.

6. Rule is made absolute accordingly in above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. In the meanwhile, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner merely on the ground of invalidation of Tribe Certificate on technical ground.

           Sd/-                             Sd/-
 [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]          [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
 bsb/Sept. 17