Bombay High Court
Sikandar Shah Gaffar Shah vs Dist. Caste Certi. Scrutiny ... on 4 August, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Urmila Sachin Phalke
1 wp3818.2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3818/2022
Sikandar Shah Gaffar Shah,
aged about 42 Yrs., Occ. Agriculturist,
R/o Near Bus Stop, Ward No.15,
Tq. Karanja (Ghadge), Dist. Wardha. ... Petitioner
- Versus -
District Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Wardha, Social Justice
and Special Assistance Department,
State of Maharashtra, through its
Member Secretary, Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar Social Justice Complex,
Near Mahila Ashram, Laxmi Nagar,
Sewa Gram Road, Railway Station Road,
Wardha. ... Respondent
-----------------
Mr. O.A. Ghare, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs. S.S. Jachak, Assistant Government Pleader for the
Respondent.
----------------
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.
DATE : 4.8.2022
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per A.S. Chandurkar, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the
learned counsel for the parties.
2 wp3818.2022
2. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order passed by
the Scrutiny Committee on 29.6.2022 thereby invalidating the
claim of the petitioners daughter of belonging to Chhaparband
VJ (A). Inter alia, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that various blood relatives have been issued validity
certificates pursuant to adjudication by this Court. Inviting
attention to the orders passed in Writ Petition Nos.5279/2017
(Riyaz Rashid Shah V/s. The District Caste Scrutiny Committee
Wardha and another), 1399/2012 (Shri Abdul Ramiz Razzak
Shaha V/s The Chairman of Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.1, Nagpur and another) and 5163/2018 (Ms.
Iftesam D/o Rajjak Shaha V/s. The State of Maharashtra and
another) it is submitted that these validity holders are blood
relatives of the petitioner. Placing reliance on the decision in
Apoorva D/o Vinay Nichale V/s. Divisional Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee No.1 and others reported in 2010(6)
Mh. L.J. 401 it is submitted that the petitioner is entitled for
similar benefit.
3 wp3818.2022
3. Perusal of family tree that was taken into consideration by
the Vigilance Cell does not indicate that names of these blood
relatives figure therein. That is the reason why the Scrutiny
Committee has observed in the impugned order that the
petitioner's relationship with those validity holders is not clear.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention to the
family tree in paragraph 3 of the writ petition which contains
names of the validity holders.
4. In view of the aforesaid facts, we find that it would be for
the petitioner to prove the relationship with those validity holders
on whose certificates reliance is sought to be placed. Since the
petitioners daughter seeks issuance of validity and she is pursuing
her higher education we are inclined to grant one opportunity to
the petitioner to substantiate the relationship with those validity
holders.
5. Hence for aforesaid reasons and to facilitate reconsideration
of the petitioners daughters claim the order dated 29.6.2022
4 wp3818.2022
passed by the Scrutiny Committee is set aside and it is directed
that Scrutiny Committee shall consider the petitioners daughters
claim of belonging to Chhaparband VJ(A) by permitting her to
submit a fresh family tree alongwith validity certificates. To
facilitate such adjudication, the petitioner shall appear before the
Scrutiny Committee on 17.8.2022. Since the petitioners daughter
is a student the Scrutiny Committee shall, within a period of three
months from the first date of the proceedings, complete the
process of adjudication. Keeping points raised in the petition
open, it is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of. Rule
accordingly. No costs.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
Tambaskar.
Signed By:NILESH VILASRAO
TAMBASKAR
Private Secretary
Date:06.08.2022 10:40
