Santosh Uttamrao Dange vs The State Of Mahrashtra And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 14336 Bom

                                               1                               45 WP.1255.2011.odt


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

                          45 WRIT PETITION NO.1255 OF 2011
                                       WITH
                         CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2630OF 2020
                                  IN WP/1255/2011

                          SANTOSH UTTAMRAO DANGE
                                   VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                       ...
Advocate for Petitioner/Applicant : Mr. Sunil M. Vibhute.
AGP for Respondent/State: Mrs. M. A. Deshpande.
Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. Kishor C. Sant.
                                         ...


                                     CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                             R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
                                     DATE          :   04th October, 2021.

PER COURT:

.                  Mr. Vibhute, learned counsel for petitioner submits that

except one contra evidence in the school record of the father of the

petitioner, all other documentary evidence stands in favour of the

petitioner recording caste as Rajput Bhamta.                 The learned counsel

submits that the affinity is not conducted. The home inquiry supports

the case of the petitioner. In that event, the Committee ought to have

validated the caste claim of the petitioner as Rajput Bhamta.



2                  The learned AGP submits that the oldest school record is

of the father of the petitioner. The same records the caste as Maratha.




    ::: Uploaded on - 07/10/2021                        ::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2021 05:07:22 :::
                                              2                               45 WP.1255.2011.odt


The same is contra entry.            Even the school record standing in the

name of the petitioner is interpolated. In some cases, the word "Rajput

Bhamta" appears in different ink. In some, the entry is only "Rajput"

and the word "Bhamta" is added subsequently. The Committee has

considered each and every document and has arrived at the

conclusion. The father's second cousin is Bapurao. His school record

also records the caste as Maratha.               All these aspects have been

considered by the Committee. At the relevant time, there were no

rules framed and as such the affinity was not conducted. No error is

committed by the Committee while passing the impugned order.



3                  It appears from the judgment that the vigilance had

conducted home inquiry and the said home inquiry appears to be

supporting the case of the petitioner. The affinity is not conducted nor

opinion of the Research Officer finds place in the vigilance report.

There are contra documents on record.                In that case, affinity also

would be relevant.



4                  In light of that, we pass the following order:


                                      ORDER

I. The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

II. The parties are relegated before the Committee.

3 45 WP.1255.2011.odt

III. The petitioner shall appear before the Committee on

26th October, 2021.

IV. The Committee may direct conduct of affinity test and

thereafter, decide the proceeding afresh preferably

within a period of four months from the date of

appearance of the petitioner.

V. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is

disposed of. No costs.

VI. In view of disposal of the writ petition, the civil

application also stands disposed of.

[ R. N. LADDHA, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] nga