Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 13210 Bom
Judgement Date : 19 December, 2022
WP 378-2020 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 378 OF 2020
Subhash s/o Mahadeorao Bhanarkar,
aged about 54 years, Occ. Service,
R/o Golibar Chowk, Near AXIS Bank ATM,
Crodac Road, Nagpur - 440002.
PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Chief Secretary,
General Administration Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,
Van Bhawan, Ramgiri Road,
Civil Lines, Nagpur.
3. Joint Commissioner & Vice-Chairman,
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Adiwasi Vikas Bhavan, Giripeth, Nagpur.
RESPONDENT S
Shri S.R. Narnaware, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A.A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents/ State.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.
DATE : 19/12/2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned
counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner was appointed as an Accountant on the post
reserved for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category.
On invalidation of his tribe claim, the petitioner approached this Court in WP 378-2020 2 Judgment
Writ Petition No. 5007/2015 raising challenge to the order passed by the
Scrutiny Committee. By the judgment dated 30/11/2015, this Court
protected the services of the petitioner subject to filing the requisite
undertaking. The services of the petitioner were thereafter placed on a
supernumerary post by respondent No.2 on 7/1/2020. Being aggrieved,
the petitioner has challenged the said order.
3. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it is seen that
the aforesaid factual position arising in similar Writ Petitions has been
considered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 375/2020 ( Satish s/o
Yashwant Ninave & Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.) decided on
3/8/2022. After noticing the judgment of the Aurangabad Bench in Writ
Petition No. 903/2020 (Raja Tukarama Shinde Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & Anr.) decided on 4/5/2021 with connected Writ Petitions,
the order placing the Assistant Teachers on a supernumerary post was set
aside and it was held that they are entitled to continue in service on the
post held by them as Assistant Teacher.
4. We find that in the light of the aforesaid decision, the
petitioner would be entitled to similar relief since he is similarly situated.
Hence, following the ratio of the decision in Raja Tukaram Shinde
(supra), the petitioner is entitled to similar relief. Accordingly, the
following order is passed :
WP 378-2020 3 Judgment
i. The order dated 7/1/2020 issued by respondent No.2 placing
the petitioner on supernumerary post is set aside. The petitioner is
entitled to continue in employment in terms of the earlier order of
protection granted by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5007/2015.
ii. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
SUMIT
Digitally signed bySUMIT CHETAN
AGRAWAL
Signing Date:20.12.2022 18:36
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!