Bombay High Court
Saima Parveen Mohammad Khan vs Akola Municipal Corporatino, ... on 17 January, 2018
Bench: Vasanti A. Naik
1 J-2267-17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.2267 OF 2017
Saima Parveen Mohammad Khan,
Aged about : years, Occ. Service,
R/o Devdi Maidan, Patur, Tq. Patur,
Distt. Akola - 444 501. ..... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. Akola Municipal Corporation,
Akola, Through its Commissioner.
2. Education Officer,
Akola Municipal Corporation,
Akola.
3. Commissioner (Backward Cell),
Amravati, Division Amravati.
4. Caste Scrutiny Committee No.2,
Akola, Through its Research Officer. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R. D. Karode, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Anjan De, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Shri S.S.Doifode, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:-
SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATED :
17/01/2018.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER SMT. VASANTI A NAIK
, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is
heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned
counsel for the parties.
2 J-2267-17.odt
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that
the respondent Nos.1 and 2 cannot insist on the production of the caste
validity certificate before promoting the petitioner on the post of
Headmistress. The petitioner seeks a direction against the Municipal
Corporation to immediately promote the petitioner to the post of
Headmistress.
The learned counsel for the petitioner states that a similar
issue like the one involved in this case was involved in the case of
Shrikant s/o Chandrakant Saindane Vrs. State of Maharashtra, and
this Court has by the judgment reported in 2012 (1) Mh.L.J. 787 held
that condition No.7 in the Government Resolution dated 5 th November,
2009 that the candidates belonging to the reserved category should
produce the caste validity certificates before their appointment or
promotion, is unreasonable. It is submitted that a direction may be
issued against the respondent - corporation to promote the petitioner
subject to the decision in the caste claim of the petitioner that is
pending before the Scrutiny Committee. It is stated that this Court may
direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the
petitioner, as early as possible, as the same is not decided till date.
The learned counsel for the corporation submitted that
though this Court has, by the order dated 18/11/2014 in Writ Petition
3 J-2267-17.odt
No.618/2014 filed by the petitioner, directed the Scrutiny Committee to
decide the caste claim of the petitioner within eight months, the
Scrutiny Committee has not decided the same. It is submitted that if this
Court directs the respondents to promote the petitioner, the same could
be made subject to the decision of the Scrutiny Committee in the caste
claim of the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the writ petition with
a direction against the Municipal Corporation to consider promoting the
petitioner on the post of Headmistress without insisting on the
submission of the caste validity certificate till the caste claim of the
petitioner is decided. We direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the
caste claim of the petitioner at the earliest. It is needless to mention that
the promotion of the petitioner would be subject to the decision of her
caste claim.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Choulwar
