Satishkumar S/O Ramrao Thakur vs The Govt. Of India Thr. The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14986 Bom

                                                               7.wp4035.2021.odt
                                            1/4



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

                         WRIT PETITION NO. 4035 OF 2021

  Satishkumar s/o Ramrao Thakur
  Aged 58 years, Occ.: Service,
  R/o. At Post Mera-Kd, Tah. Chikhli,
  Dist. Buldana.                                    .... PETITIONER

                                       // VERSUS //

  1. The Govt. of India,
  Through the Principal Secretary,
  Ministry of Defence,
  New Delhi.

  2. The Administration Officer,
  Central Army Fighter Vehicle Depot,
  Kirkee,
  Pune - 03 [PIN-908798 C/o 56 APO]

  3. The Personal Officer,
  Central Army Fighter Vehicle Depot,
  Kirkee,
  Pune - 03 [PIN-908798 C/o 56 APO]

  4. The Chairman, the Schedule Tribe
  Caste Certificate Verification Committee,
  Amravati, Dist. Amravati.                                .... RESPONDENTS

  Shri Gunjan R. Kothari, Advocate for petitioner.
  Ms. Mugdha Chandurkar, Advocate h/f Shri U.M. Aurangabadkar,
  ASGI for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
  Shri S.M. Ukey, AGP for respondent No.4/State.
  ____________________________________________________________

                                CORAM       : SUNIL B. SHUKRE, AND
                                              ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

                                DATE        : 13th OCTOBER, 2021.





                                                                    7.wp4035.2021.odt

ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER: S.B. Shukre, J.]

1. Leave to amend the cause title by changing the

designation of respondent No.4-Committee is granted.

2. Amendment be carried out forthwith.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Ms. Mugdha Chandurkar, learned counsel for

respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Shri S.M.Ukey, Additional Government

Pleader, for respondent No.4, both of whom appear by waving

notice for respondents respectively.

5. The issue involved in the petition is limited and it can

be dealt with by passing appropriate directions to the respondent-

Committee.

6. Hence, Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The

matter is heard finally by the consent of the learned counsel for the

parties.

7.wp4035.2021.odt

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribe

claim of the petitioner is pending with respondent No.4-Committee

since, the year 2019. He further points out that there is already a

validity existing in the paternal family of the petitioner and this

validity has been granted to Ganesh Uttamrao Thakur on the basis

of the judgment of this Court dated 08.03.2019 in Writ Petition

No.1079 of 2005, copy of which has been already submitted before

respondent No.4-Committee.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

even though the petitioner is about 58 years of age, still two years of

his service have been left.

9. In view of above, we pass the following order:-

(i) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.

(ii) Respondent No.4-Committee is directed to decide the

Tribe claim of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period

of four months from the date of the order.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent No.4

Committee on 17.11.2021.

7.wp4035.2021.odt

iv) Meanwhile, no coercive steps shall be taken in relation

to the service of the petitioner till the Scrutiny Committee decides

the Tribe Claim of the Petitioner, as above and in case, the decision

goes against the petitioner, for a further period of two weeks from

the date of such adverse decision, if any.

Rule accordingly. No costs.

                          JUDGE                             JUDGE
Kavita