Swapnil Baban Shinde vs State Of Maha. Thr. Sec. Rural ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2690 Bom

                                  :1:                             21.wp-3494-23.odt




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     WRIT PETITION NO.3494 OF 2023

 Swapnil Baban Shinde                                        .....Petitioner
            Versus
 State of Maharashtra & Ors.                                 .... Respondents

                               -----
 Mr. C.K. Bhangoji, Advocate i/b. R.K. Mendadkar, for the
 Petitioner.
 Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
 Mr. Sagar Kursija, Advocate a/w. Harishchandra D. Chavan,
 Suraj Jeswani i/b. T.D. Deshmukh, for the Respondent No.3.
                               -----


                                        CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

                                        DATE    : 20th MARCH, 2023
 P.C. :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The Petitioner had earlier approached a Division

Bench of this Court vide Writ Petition No.2045/2021. In

clause (vi) of the operative part in paragraph No.9.1, it was

mentioned thus :

"(vi) Consequently, the order dated 16th July, 2021 passed by the Respondent No.3-Collector, Pune also stands set aside;"

1 of 5

Deshmane(PS)

:2: 21.wp-3494-23.odt

. By the same order clause (iv), the Division Bench

had directed that the Petitioner's caste validity claim be

decided afresh by the Committee after following the due

process of law as contemplated by the provisions of the Caste

Certificate Rules, 2012 within a period of four weeks from

the date of uploading of the said order.

3. After this order was passed, the Caste Scrutiny

Committee again considered the Petitioner's case for issuing

or otherwise of caste validity certificate and the caste

scrutiny committee had rejected his claim by the order dated

7.2.2023. The fresh order passed by the Caste Scrutiny

Committee was challenged by the Petitioner before a

Division Bench of this Court vide Writ Petition

No.2742/2023. In that Petition on 9.3.2023, the following

order was passed :

"Arguments are concluded. Judgment/order is reserved."

. There is no reference to any stay having been

granted for the disqualification of the Petitioner.

                                                                             2 of 5





                                :3:                          21.wp-3494-23.odt

4. The Collector i.e. the Respondent No.2 addressed

a communication to the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla

Parishad, Pune on 13.3.2023 and in the last paragraph it was

mentioned that since the Caste Scrutiny Committee had

rejected the Petitioner's claim vide order dated 7.2.2023 and

since his caste certificate was cancelled, the Collector's

earlier order dated 16.7.2021 be implemented immediately.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that

once a Division Bench had specifically set aside the order

dated 16.7.2021, it was not a valid order. It can not be made

effective by the Collector himself and, therefore, the

directions issued by the Collector for implementation of the

same order is illegal.

6. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.3

submitted that since the Petitioner had failed to obtain relief

in the nature of stay in the pending Writ Petition

No.2742/2023 he has chosen to file this Petition to

circumvent the implied order of the Division Bench not

3 of 5

:4: 21.wp-3494-23.odt

granting stay.

7. Learned AGP submitted that once the caste

certificate was not validated the Petitioner was automatically

disqualified.

8. I have considered all these submissions. Since

the order is reserved by the Division Bench of this Court in

Writ Petition No.2742/2023, therefore, the order in that Writ

Petition would have important bearing on the entire issue.

However, at this stage, the fact remains that the order dated

16.7.2021 passed by the Respondent No.2 herein had stood

set aside. It obviously cannot be revived. Therefore, the

Respondent No.2's communication for implementation of the

said order cannot be justified. To that extent, the Petitioner's

counsel's submissions is correct. Therefore, it is necessary to

set aside that particular communication. It is made clear that

the Respondent No.2 is free to take steps in accordance with

law keeping in view the order passed by the Division Bench

in Writ Petition No.2742/2023 on 9.3.2023. It follows that

the communication dated 13.3.2023 issued by the

4 of 5

:5: 21.wp-3494-23.odt

Respondent No.2 addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of

the Zilla Parishad, Pune is set aside. It is again clarified that

the Respondent No.2 the Collector can take steps in

accordance with law. The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

5 of 5