Bombay High Court
Ramesh S/O Vasantrao Kumbhare vs The General Manager National Bank ... on 6 March, 2023
Bench: Sandeep V. Marne
60-WP.6129.2021+2
jvs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION
SALUNKE
JV WRIT PETITION NO. 6129 OF 2021
Digitally signed
by SALUNKE J V
Date: 2023.03.08
16:37:03 +0530
Ramesh S/o. Vasantrao Kumbhare } Petitioner
Versus
The General Manager, National Bank }
for Agriculture & Rural Development } Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6130 OF 2021
Rakesh s/o. Wamanrao Kumbhare } Petitioner
Versus
The General Manager, National Bank }
for Agriculture & Rural Development } Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6131 OF 2021
Kashinath s/o. Namdeorao Kadwe } Petitioner
Versus
The General Manager, National Bank }
for Agriculture & Rural Development } Respondents
Ms. Anita Gavkar i/b. Mr. Sushant C.
Yeramwar for the petitioners in all petitions.
Mr. S. P. Bharti for the respondent.
CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, Act.CJ.&
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATE: MARCH 6, 2023
P.C.:
1. The petitioners were employed as clerks by the respondent
from Scheduled Tribe category. Subsequently, the claim of the
petitioners as belonging to Scheduled Tribe category was
invalidated. The petitioners filed writ petitions before this Court
60-WP.6129.2021+2
at Nagpur Bench. The Division Bench of this Court at Nagpur,
while partly allowing the writ petitions, passed the following
order: -
"3. In that view of the matter, for the reasons recorded by us
while allowing Writ Petition No. 900 of 2012 and other petitions
on 9.10.2012, we allow this petition in the following terms:
(i) The petition, in so far as the challenge to order
passed by the Scrutiny Committee is concerned, stands
dismissed.
(ii) the respondent-employer is directed not to
terminate the services of the petitioner on the ground of
invalidation of his tribe claim. However, it is made clear
that the protection which is granted to the petitioner is
only in respect of his initial appointment. It is also made
clear that if any promotions are granted to the petitioner
on the basis of his claim as belonging to the Scheduled
Tribe, the Authorities would be at liberty to withdraw the
benefits and revert the petitioner to such of the post to
which he would be legitimately entitled i.e. his entry into
service is to be treated from open category.
(iii) The petitioner to file an undertaking within a period
of three weeks from today, that hereinafter neither the
petitioner not his progeny would be entitled to claim any
benefits on the basis of belonging to the Scheduled Tribe."
2. Paragraph 3 is clear. The Court only protected the initial
appointment of the petitioners; however, it also observed that if
any promotions are granted to the petitioners on the basis of their
claim as belonging to the Scheduled Tribe, the authorities would
be at liberty to withdraw the benefits and revert the petitioners to
such of the post to which they would be legitimately entitled, i.e.,
their entry into service is to be treated from open category.
3. The respondent, pursuant to the said judgment, reverted
the petitioners and subsequently the petitioners are promoted
from general category.
4. The only contention raised by the learned advocate for the
petitioners is that if the petitioners would have been reverted in
the year 2012-2013, then, the petitioners would have passed
departmental examination from general category.
60-WP.6129.2021+2
5. The same cannot be subject matter of consideration in the
present writ petitions. The respondents acted as per the judgment
of this Court at Nagpur Bench, in which, the subject matter of
challenge was the invalidation of the caste claims of the
petitioners. Only because the said judgment was followed
belatedly would be no ground to interfere in the present writ
petitions.
6. In light of the above, the writ petitions stand dismissed.
Rule is discharged. No costs.
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
