Maithili D/O Shrikant ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10295 Bom

                           1

                                         06-10-2022-wp-3566-2022.odt

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
              Writ Petition No.3566 of 2022

Maithili D/o Shrikant Talegaonkar,
Aged 17 years,
Occ.: Education,
(Since minor),
through natural guardian father
Shrikant S/o Panjabrao Talegaonkar,
Aged about 47 years,
Occ.: Service,
R/o Rashtrasant Colony,
Arjun Nagar, Amravati,
Tq. & Dist. Amravati.                                   ... Petitioner

     Versus

1.   State of Maharashtra,
     through Department of Tribal
     Welfare and Social Justice,
     Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

2.   District Caste Certificate
     Scrutiny Committee, Amravati,
     B-Wing, 1st Floor,
     Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Samajik Nyay Bhawan,
     Camp Road, Amravati,
     e-mail : [email protected]        ... Respondents


Shri P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.


        CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE & G.A. SANAP, JJ.

DATE : 6th OCTOBER, 2022

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

06-10-2022-wp-3566-2022.odt

2. In this case, the caste validity certificates granted to the father

and paternal uncle of the petitioner have been ignored by the

respondent No.2- Scrutiny Committee on the ground that while

issuing those validity certificates, no proper procedure was followed

by the then Scrutiny Committee. The reason so given for not

accepting the evidence of validity certificates granted to the relatives

of the petitioner from his paternal side is untenable in law. By opining

that the validity certificates were granted without following the

procedure of law, the present Scrutiny Committee, i.e. the respondent

No.2, is sitting in appeal over the previous Scrutiny Committee, which

is not permissible in law. The respondent No.2- Scrutiny Committee

cannot examine it's own order as if at the later point of time, it has

become an appellate authority. However, if it is found by the

respondent No.2- Scrutiny Committee that the validity certificates

granted earlier by it were obtained by fraud or by misrepresentation of

material facts or by suppression of important facts, the Scrutiny

Committee would have power to cancel those certificates, but even for

that purpose, the show cause notice is required to be given to those

certificate holders. In his case, there is no finding recorded by the

respondent No.2- Scrutiny Committee that the earlier validity

certificates were obtained by fraud or by misrepresenting the material

facts or by suppressing the important facts, nor any notice has been

06-10-2022-wp-3566-2022.odt

issued to the paternal relatives of the petitioner for showing cause

against the proposed action of cancellation of those validity

certificates. Therefore, we find that the view taken by the respondent

No.2- Scrutiny Committee in not considering the evidence of validity

certificates granted to the paternal relatives by the previous Scrutiny

Committee, is illegal. This evidence, in our view, constitutes sufficient

evidence of the social status claimed by the petitioner, and this is all

the more so because those validity certificates have now attained the

finality.

3. In the result, this petition, in our view, deserves to be allowed

and it is allowed accordingly. The respondent No.2- Scrutiny

Committee is directed to issue a caste validity certificate to the

petitioner as belonging to 'Bhope', Nomadic Tribe (B) within a period

of two weeks from the date of the receipt of the order.

4. Rule accordingly. No costs.

                                       (G.A. SANAP, J.)                      (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)
          Lanjewar




Digitally Signed By :P D
LANJEWAR
Signing Date:07.10.2022
12:36