Shri. Vishal Bhika Khade vs Commissioner, Kalyan Domivail ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3332 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:10420-DB

             k                                     1/3                  31 wp 3434.17 as.doc




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                        WRIT PETITION NO.3434 OF 2017

             Akshay Datta Chatur                            ....Petitioner
                  V/S
             Commissioner,
             Kalyan Dombivali Municipal Corporation & Ors.  ....Respondents
                                                ...
                                              WITH
                               WRIT PETITION NO.8276 OF 2017

             Vishal Bhika Khade                                            ....Petitioner
                   V/S
             Commissioner,
             Kalyan Dombivali Municipal Corporation & Ors.                 ....Respondents
                                                ...

             Mr. Sandip R. Khurkute for the Petitioner in both WPs.
             Mr. A.S. Rao for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State in both WPs.
                                                 ...

                                                CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ &
                                                       SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
                                                DATE : 03 APRIL 2023.


             P.C.:

             1        The Petitioners herein were appointed as a Peon by the Respondent-

             Corporation on or about 3 July 2014 from Scheduled Tribe category. They

             were terminated from service on 20 December 2016 on the ground that the

             Petitioners failed to produce the validity certificate. It appears that the claim

             of the Petitioners for issuance of validity certificate was referred to the

             Committee. The Committee validated the caste claim of the Petitioners. It

             katkam                                      1/3

                 ::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2023                  ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2023 05:05:45 :::
 k                                    2/3                   31 wp 3434.17 as.doc




appears that the Petitioners were late in submitting the Application for

validation of their caste certificate.

2        Nonetheless fact remains that the Scrutiny Committee has validated

the caste claim of the present Petitioners. The caste claim of the Petitioner

Akshay is validated by the Committee under its judgment and order dated 5

May 2022 and the claim of the Petitioner Vishal is validated under order

dated 22 November 2017 and the validity certificate is issued to him on 22

November 2017.

3        The caste claim of the Petitioners as belonging to Koli Mahadev

Scheduled Tribe is validated. It is proved that the Petitioners belong to

Scheduled Tribe community. The Petitioners were appointed on Class IV

post from Scheduled Tribe category. It appears that delay has been caused

in issuance of the validity certificates.

4        We also heard the learned Counsel for the Respondent-Corporation.

5        The learned Counsel for the Respondent-Corporation submits that

the Petitioners were duty-bound to produce the validity certificates within six

months of the date of their appointment as per the relevant Government

Resolution, upon failure to do so the Respondent-Corporation rightly

passed the impugned order.




katkam                                      2/3

    ::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2023                  ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2023 05:05:45 :::
 k                                       3/3                     31 wp 3434.17 as.doc




6          As now the Petitioners possess the validity certificates though having

obtained belatedly it is true that they belonged to Scheduled Tribe category.

We are inclined to set aside the impugned order of termination and direct

the Respondent-Corporation to reinstate the Petitioners however, as there

was delay on the part of the Petitioners we are not inclined to grant back-

wages to them.

7          In the result, we pass the following order:

                                      ORDER

i) The impugned orders of termination are quashed and set aside. The

Respondent-Corporation shall reinstate the Petitioners on their original

post. The Petitioners will be entitled for continuity in service however, shall

not be entitled to back-wages.

ii) Rule accordingly made absolute in above terms.

iii) The Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

       (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)                       (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)




katkam                                        3/3