Bombay High Court
Vijay S/O Vitthal Panhalkar vs The Union Of India, Ministry Of ... on 14 July, 2021
Bench: S.S. Jadhav, Surendra Pandharinath Tavade
20.wp.2730.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2730 OF 2021
Vijay Vitthal Panhalkar ... Petitioner
V/s.
Union of India and Ors. ... Respondents
-------------------
Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar for the Petitioner.
Mr. V.M. Mali- AGP for the respondents/State.
---------------------
CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV &
SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATED : JULY 14, 2021.
P.C. :
. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable with the consent of the
parties.
2. The petitioner herein was working in the Ministry of
Defence and was appointed as a labourer-B Grade vide judgment and
order dated 7th February 1985. He was given service from the reserved
category subsequently he was promoted as Danger Building Worker, B-
Grade from the same category. However, on 19 th December 2013 the
respondent no.3 had directed the petitioner to submit caste validity
certificate for the purpose of continuation in service. The petitioner at
that moment did not have requisite documents to submit a proposal for
verification of his tribe claim to the Committee.
varsha 1 of 3
20.wp.2730.2021.doc
3. The petitioner has submitted on-line proposal on 22nd
August 2020. The request of the petitioner to give a recommendation
for submission of proposal was denied by the respondent no.3. The
Scrutiny Committee i.e. the respondent nos. 2 had refused to accept
the proposal since the proposal is not supported by a recommendation
letter of the employer.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance
upon the orders passed by the Aurangabad bench in Writ Petition No.
14313 of 2017 and Writ Petition No. 406 of 2020, wherein in similar
circumstances the Court has held that there is no bar to any person for
submitting a proposal for verification of his caste claim. It is incumbent
upon the committee to accept the proposal for verification of the caste
certificate. The only pre-requisite is that it should be submitted along
with all the required documents necessary for the purpose of
verification and the committee cannot make it mandatory to insist, that
the proposal be supported by a recommendation of the employer.
Hence the scrutiny Committee is hereby directed to accept the
proposal filed by the petitioner and consider the same at the earliest.
The scrutiny committee shall accept the proposal provided, it is filed in
a proper format.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is to retire on superannuation in October 2022. In view of
this, the Scrutiny Committee, shall, in any case, decide the caste claim
of the petitioner within four months from the date of filing of the
proposal.
varsha 2 of 3
20.wp.2730.2021.doc
6. Rule is discharged. Writ Petition stands disposed in above
terms.
7. This Court has not considered the issue of termination of
the petitioner and hence all contentions in respect of challenge to the
termination are kept open.
(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J) (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J)
varsha 3 of 3
