Bombay High Court
Sharvil Purushottam Charude Thr. ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 14 December, 2021
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, R. N. Laddha
1_WP1586_21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1586 OF 2021
Sharvil Purushottam Charude through father
Purushottam Bhagwan Charude ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents
Mr. R. K. Mendadkar a/w. Mr. T. V. Jadhav for Petitioner.
Mrs. P. N. Diwan, AGP for Respondents-State.
CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA &
R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 14, 2021
P.C. :-
By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 27.08.2020 passed by
respondent No.2-Committee with further direction to respondent No.2-
Committee to issue certificate of validity in relation to the caste
certificate dated 26.06.2010 issued to the petitioner by respondent No.3
Competent Authority.
2. The petitioner was granted caste certificate by the Competent
Authority on 26.06.2010 certifying that the petitioner belongs to
Mahadeo Koli.
3. Before the Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner placed reliance
upon the caste validity certificates issued by the Scrutiny Committee
itself in favour of the father of the petitioner - Purushottam Bhagwan
Charude, brother of the petitioner - Ameya Purushottam Charude and
cousin uncle of the petitioner - Subhash Rajaram Charude. It is the case
of the petitioner that since the Scrutiny Committee has already validated
the caste claim of the father, brother and cousin uncle of the petitioner,
Scrutiny Committee by the impugned order could not have rejected the
caste validity claim of the petitioner.
1_WP1586_21.doc
4. Learned AGP, on the other hand, strongly placed reliance upon the
contentions raised in the affidavit in reply filed by the Scrutiny
Committee and relied upon certain documents prior to the appointed
date in support of the submissions that the entry in those pre-
constitutional documents would show caste as Hindu Koli and not
Mahadeo Koli. She submitted that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has
already issued separate show cause notices against the father, brother
and cousin uncle of the petitioner as to why their caste validity
certificates should not be cancelled and they have already filed reply to
the show cause notice issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee which
proceedings are still pending since the last two years.
5. During the course of arguments, Mr. Mendadkar, learned counsel
relied upon several judgments for consideration of this Court. While
dealing with one of the judgments referred to and relied upon by the
learned AGP in case of Rushikesh Bharat Garud Vs. State of
Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.11536 of 2021), learned counsel for the
petitioner pointed out that the said judgment is already set aside by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7442 of 2021 on
10.12.2021. He submits that no reliance thus can be placed by learned
AGP on the judgment delivered by this Court thereby rejecting Writ
Petition No.11536 of 2021 filed by Rushikesh Bharat Garud before this
Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the three
caste validity certificates relied upon by the petitioner which were issued
in favour of his father, brother and cousin uncle are subject matter of
show cause notices issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee for recalling
those certificates on various grounds and the said proceedings are still
pending.
7. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rushikesh Bharat Garud (supra) on which
1_WP1586_21.doc
Mr. Mendadkar, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon.
8. This Court in Writ Petition No.11536 of 2021 had rejected the
caste claim of the petitioner therein. The petitioner therein impugned the
said judgment of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal No.7442 of 2021. In paragraph 4 of the said judgment, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court noticed that the cases of the father of the
appellant and his cousins had been re-opened and the notices had been
issued to show cause why their caste certificates be not cancelled. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the validity of the caste
certificates in favour of the father of the appellant and in favour of his
cousins was at large before the Scrutiny Committee and thus it would be
appropriate if the cases of all, namely father of the appellant, cousins of
the appellant and the appellant therein be considered together, to avoid
any conflicting orders.
9. In paragraph 5 of the said order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, it was directed that without expressing anything on the validity of
the caste certificate issued in favour of the appellant, the impugned
judgment and order of the High Court is set aside and the matter is
remanded to the Scrutiny Committee to consider the validity of the caste
certificate issued in favour of the appellant therein afresh along with the
cases of his father and his cousins whose cases were sought to be re-
opened and the said issue was at large before the Scrutiny Committee.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court accordingly directed the Scrutiny
Committee to pass fresh orders in accordance with law and on its own
merits and on the basis of the material available on record and / or that
may be produced and pass a speaking order at the earliest, preferably
within a period of three months from the date of the said order.
10. In this petition also the petitioner's case for caste claim is solely
depending upon the caste validity certificates issued by the Caste
Scrutiny Committee in favour of the father, brother and cousin uncle of
1_WP1586_21.doc
the petitioner which are the subject matter of the show cause notices
issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee and the issue is at large. If the
caste validity certificates issued in favour of the father, brother and
cousin uncle of the petitioner are found valid in the enquiry initiated by
the Caste Scrutiny Committee pursuant to show cause notices issued by
the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner would also get benefit of
the said order. On the other hand, if the caste validity certificates issued
by the Caste Scrutiny Committee in favour of the father, brother and
cousin uncle of the petitioner are recalled under the provisions of the
Maharashtra Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes
(Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special
Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste
Certificate Act, 2000 then in that event the caste claim of the petitioner
will be required to be rejected.
11. Without going into the correctness of the impugned order and to
avoid any inconsistency and conflicting orders in those three
proceedings which are sought to be re-opened by the Caste Scrutiny
Committee in case of the father, brother and cousin uncle of the
petitioner, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed
by the Caste Scrutiny Committee and remand this matter also to the
Caste Scrutiny Committee who has issued show cause notices to the
father, brother and cousin uncle of the petitioner for considering the
caste claim of the petitioner afresh jointly with the other three cases viz.,
petitioner's father's, brother's and cousin uncle's cases to have
consistency and to avoid any conflicting orders.
12. We are informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
proceedings in the said show cause notice issued to the petitioner by the
Caste Scrutiny Committee are pending since the last two years. Mrs.
Diwan, learned AGP strongly contended that the father, brother and
cousin uncle of the petitioner are taking adjournments again and again
before the Caste Scrutiny Committee for the reasons best known to
1_WP1586_21.doc
them. Statements made by learned AGP and learned counsel for the
petitioner are accepted.
13. We accordingly pass the following order:-
a. The impugned order dated 27.08.2020 passed by
respondent No.2-Committee is quashed and set aside;
b. The caste claim of the petitioner is remanded to
respondent No.2-Committee to be heard along with the
show causes notices issued by respondent No.2-
Committee against the father, brother and cousin uncle
of the petitioner;
c. Respondent No.2-Committee shall consider the case of
the petitioner also along with the father, brother and
cousin uncle of the petitioner;
d. The petitioner would also be at liberty to rely upon the
additional documents before Respondent No.2-
Committee;
e. Respondent No.2-Committee shall pass an order on the
said three show cause notices and in the caste claim of
the petitioner together in accordance with law;
f. The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2-
Committee on 21.12.2021 at 11:00 a.m. Father, brother
and cousin uncle of the petitioner shall also remain
present before respondent No.2-Committee on the said
date and time to enable respondent No.2-Committee to
fix an early date for hearing of the show cause notices
and the caste claim of the petitioner. The petitioner as
well as his father, brother and cousin uncle shall co-
operate with respondent No.2-Committee so as to enable
respondent No.2-Committee to decide the matter
expeditiously and not later than eight weeks from the
date of the first meeting;
1_WP1586_21.doc
g. If the petitioner or his father, brother and cousin uncle
do not co-operate with respondent No.2-Committee,
their conduct shall be recorded in the Rojnama; and
h. All contentions of the petitioner raised in this petition
and the contentions of his father, brother and cousin
uncle raised in the reply to the show cause notices are
kept open.
14. Writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be
no order as to costs.
15. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
16. Learned AGP to convey this order to respondent No.2-Committee
for information and compliance.
(R. N. LADDHA, J.) (R. D. DHANUKA, J.)
Minal Parab
