Bombay High Court
Ku. Divya Vinod Kosle vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 19 January, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
WP 8004.19 judg sss.odt. 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.8004/2019
Ku. Divya Vinod Kosle,
Age about 27 years, Occ.-Student,
R/o.-New Ambika Nagar, Mardi Road, Amravati,
Tq. and Dist. Amravati. ..... Petitioner.
- Versus -
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nanded,
through its Secretary, Office at Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar
Social Justice Bhawan, near Gnyanmata School, Namaskar
Square, Nanded, Tq. and Dist. Nanded.
3. District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati,
1st Floor Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Social Justice Bhawan,
Camp Road, Amravati.
4. Sub Divisional Officer, Amravati,
Office at near Telephone Exchange Shyam Chowk,
Amravati, Tq. and Dist.Amravati. .....Respondents.
**********************************************************************
Mr. P.S. Patil, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms H.N. Jaipurkar, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 4.
*********************************************************************************************************
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR &
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
DATE : 19-01-2022.
Oral Judgment (Per : Pushpa V Ganediwala, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned
Counsel Mr. P.S. Patil on behalf of the petitioner and Ms H.N. Jaipurkar,
WP 8004.19 judg sss.odt. 2/5
learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. The petitioner herein is seeking direction to respondent
no.2-District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nanded, to accept
and decide the caste scrutiny proposal of the petitioner dated
30-07-2019 on the basis of caste certificate issued to her by the Sub-
Divisional Officer, Amravati.
3. It is not disputed that the father and forefathers of the
petitioner are originally residents of village Ghoti, Taluka Kinvat, District
Nanded. The father of the petitioner namely Vinod Ramchandra Kosle
is having Caste Validity Certificate issued by the Caste Certificate
Scrutiny, Aurangabad Division, Committee No.2, Lature. The petitioner
states that the respondent no.3 issued Caste Validity Certificate in
favour of elder sister of the petitioner on the basis of Caste Certificate
issued by Sub Divisional Officer, Amravati. It is the case of the
petitioner that the respondent no.3-Committee is reluctant to verify the
caste claim of the petitioner on the ground that as per Rule 5(1) of the
Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis),
Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward
Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate
Rules, 2012 (for short, Rules, 2012'), the caste certificate of the
petitioner has to be issued by the competent authority from the place
where the father and forefathers of the petitioner were resident of the
area of territorial jurisdiction of that competent authority on deemed
WP 8004.19 judg sss.odt. 3/5
date i.e. 13-10-1967. Accordingly, the respondent no.3-Committee,
Amravati forwarded the petitioner's proposal for scrutiny to respondent
no.-2-Committee, Nanded.
4. The respondent no.2-Committee, Nanded, also expressed its
inability to entertain the caste claim of the petitioner since the caste
certificate of the petitioner was issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer,
Amravati. Since the petitioner is required to run from pillar to post she
is constrained to approach this Court.
5. With the assistance of learned Counsel for the petitioner
and learned Assistant Government Pleader, we have read Rule 5(1) of
the Rules, 2012. As stated earlier, it is not disputed that the father
and forefathers of the petitioner were ordinarily residents within the
area of territorial jurisdiction of Sub Divisional Officer Nanded on
deemed date i.e. on 13-10-1967. As per Rule 5(1) of the Rules, 2012,
the competent authority has jurisdiction to issue caste certificate to the
applicant who himself or whose father or grand father or great grand
father was ordinarily residing within the area of territorial jurisdiction of
that competent authority on deemed date. The deemed date as
defined under Rule 2(e) for Other Backward Classes is 13-10-1967.
6. For ready reference Rule 5(1) of the Rules, 2012 and
Definition Rule 2(e) are reproduced below :
WP 8004.19 judg sss.odt. 4/5
"5(1) The Competent Authority may issue Caste Certificate
to an applicant who himself or whose father or grand father
or great grand father was ordinarily residing within the area
of territorial jurisdiction of that Competent Authority on
deemed date."
"(e) "deemed date" means the 10th August, 1950 i.e. date
of Presidential Order for Scheduled Caste; and the 21st
November, 1961 for De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis) and
Nomadic Tribe; and the 13th October, 1967 for Other
Backward Classes and Special Backward Category;"
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms Jaipurkar
appearing on behalf of the respondents in her affidavit in reply also
conceded the aforesaid position of law.
8. In the light of Rule 5(1) of the aforesaid Rules, the Sub
Divisional Officer, Nanded would have territorial jurisdiction to issue
caste certificate to the petitioner and consequently, the respondent
no.2-Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nanded, would have to verify the caste
claim of the petitioner,
9. In this view of the matter, the communication dated
11-09-2019 issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nanded is
required to be quashed and set aside and the same is accordingly,
quashed and set aside. The petitioner is permitted to apply to the Sub-
Divisional Officer, Nanded for issuance of caste certificate of belonging
WP 8004.19 judg sss.odt. 5/5
to 'Mali' Other Backward Class. The Sub Divisional Officer, Nanded to
issue caste certificate to the petitioner within 15 days from the date of
such application. The respondent no.2-Committee, Nanded, thereafter
shall decide the caste verification claim of the petitioner in accordance
with law within 9 months from the date of receipt of such proposal.
10. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
(Pushpa V. Ganediwala, J.) (A.S. Chandurkar, J.)
Deshmukh
