Bombay High Court
Dr. Samata Wamanrao Warudkar vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Its ... on 5 August, 2024
Author: Nitin W. Sambre
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
2024:BHC-NAG:8498-DB
1 mca650.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 650 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1927 OF 2014 (D)
( Dr. Samata Wamanrao Warudkar ..vs.. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Ministry of
Health, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. S.R. Narnaware, Counsel for the applicant/petitioner,
Mr. N.S. Rao, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5.
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE &
ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATED : 05-08-2024
The present application is filed by the original
petitioner seeking review of the judgment passed by this
Court dismissing the petition. The review is sought
mainly on the ground that the petitioner having denied
the relationship with Narayan, this Court committed an
error in relying on the document of Narayan. The fact
was before the Committee.
2. It is claimed that the mandate provided in the
judgment of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Addl.
Commissioner, Tribal Development and others reported
in (1994) 6 SCC 241, particularly observations made in
paragraph 15 mandates the committee to deal with such
denial of relationship.
2 mca650.24
3. As against above, Mr. N.S. Rao, learned Assistant
Government Pleader would urge that the application is
devoid of any error apparent on the face of record.
4. We have appreciated the submissions.
5. The fact remains that though the petitioner has
come out with a plea of the denial of relationship with
Narayan, however, it is categorically mentioning the
name of Narayan in the family tree in the reply which is
produced at Page No.54 of the petition by the petitioner
herself.
6. Apart from above, during the enquiry carried out
by the vigilance cell, each of the relatives of the
petitioner have narrated the family tree by there own
choice and convenience.
7. The Committee, in such an eventuality, has rightly
recorded the findings of fact and this Court rather
accepted the findings of fact in view of the provisions of
Section 8 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis),
Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special
Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and
Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000.
8. That being so, no error on the face of record is
noticed. The application, in our opinion, is devoid of
merit, stands rejected.
3 mca650.24
9. The interim order granted shall continue to
operate till 31-8-2024.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)
adgokar
Signed by: MR. P.M. ADGOKAR
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 05/08/2024 18:59:31
