Bombay High Court
Ashvini Chandrakant Saindane And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 9 August, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, R. N. Laddha
.. 1 ..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.653 OF 2021
1. Ashvini D/o. Chandrakant Saindane
Age : 29 years, Occu : Student
2. Rupali d/o Vasant Saindane
Age : 29 years, Occu : Student
Both R/o. A/p. Nanded,
Tal. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon .. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar
Through its Member Secretary .. Respondents
...
Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr Sushant C. Yeramwar
AGP for the Respondents / State : Mr A.R. Kale
...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
R.N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATE : 09-08-2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) : -
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent
of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
2. The caste claim of the petitioners as Tokare Koli -
Scheduled Tribe was referred to the Respondent / Scrutiny Committee
Gajanan
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2021 00:47:48 :::
.. 2 ..
for verification. The Committee has dismissed the proposal.
Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition.
3. Mr Yeramwar, learned Advocate for the petitioners
submits that, the petitioners had given an application to close the file
and cancel the caste certificates issued to the petitioners. The
petitioners have not taken benefit of the reservation. However, the
Committee decided the proceedings on merits. The petitioners were
not given opportunity of putting forth their case. The Committee
ought to have accepted the application of the petitioners for closing
the matter and for cancelling the caste certificates and if the
Committee was of the view that, the request of the petitioners for
cancelling the caste certificates is to be rejected, then opportunity
ought to have been granted to contest the matter on merits.
4. The learned AGP submits that, the caste certificates are
obtained by the petitioners and the same were sent for verification.
The Committee was within its powers to consider the matter on merits.
The notice was issued to the petitioners. It was for the petitioners to
avail the opportunity.
5. We have considered the submissions.
Gajanan
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2021 00:47:48 :::
.. 3 ..
6. It is not disputed that, the claim of the petitioners was
pending for a long time. The petitioners on or about 07-02-2020 had
given an application that the petitioners have not taken benefit of
reservation and the file may be closed and the certificates may be
returned to them. The Committee thereafter proceeded further to
decide the matter on merits. It appears that, the petitioners had not
argued the matter before the Committee.
7. The Committee ought to have decided the application of
the petitioners of not proceeding further in the matter and if the
Committee was of the opinion that the caste certificates now are
required to be verified, should have proceeded after giving appropriate
opportunity to the petitioners.
8. In light of the fact that the petitioners were not given
opportunity, we pass the following order.
ORDER
(i) The impugned order is quashed and set aside.
(ii) The parties are relegated before the Respondent / Committee.
Gajanan
.. 4 ..
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the Scrutiny Committee on
28-09-2021 and put forth their stand.
(iv) The Committee may decide the application of the petitioners
dated 07-02-2020 on its own merits. If the Committee is of the opinion
that, the matter is required to be decided on merits, then appropriate
opportunity be given to the petitioners.
9. With the aforesaid observations, Writ Petition is partly
allowed. Rule made accordingly partly absolute. No costs.
[ R.N. LADDHA ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA ]
JUDGE JUDGE
...
Gajanan
