Bombay High Court
Vishal Prakash Makhana Om Vishal ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 20 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:18823-DB
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
927 WRIT PETITION NO. 9831 OF 2023
VISHAL PRAKASH MAKHANA OM VISHAL MAKHANA
THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER PETITIONER NO. 1
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Chapalgaonkar Shailesh S.
AGP for Respondents : Mr. A.R. Kale
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 20 AUGUST 2024
PER COURT :
Heard both the sides finally at the stage of admission.
2. The petitioner is challenging the order of the
respondent no. 2 - Scrutiny Committee, refusing to validate his
'Nhavi (108)' OBC certificate.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that
petitioner's father possess certificate of validity which was issued
by following due process of law. Even subsequently, his second
degree cousins have also been issued with certificates of validity by
following due process of law. The Committee by referring to some
record stated to be describing the petitioner's blood relatives as
'Hindu Marwadi Nhavi' or 'Marwadi Hindu Nhavi' has refused to
extend the benefit of validities in the family. It is unthinkable that
though the father is certified to be belonging to a particular caste,
the son cannot be tread so. Even if the Committee has now
decided to undertake fresh scrutiny of the validity in his family, the
petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit since the process of re-
consideration would be a long drawn process. The petitioner is
ready to face the consequences contemplated in Shweta Balaji
Isankar Versus State of Maharashtra and others, passed by this
High Court in Writ Petition No. 5611/2018.
4. Learned AGP would oppose the petition. He would take
us through the record particularly the judgment indicating that the
petitioner's ancestors were referred to as 'Marwadi Hindu Nhavi' or
'Hindu Marwadi Nhavi' which is not the same as 'Nhavi OBC
(108)'. He would also submit that the Committee having reached a
conclusion about the validity holders having obtained certificate by
fraud and has decided to undertake fresh scrutiny.
5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused
the papers.
6. At the outset, it is necessary to note that in spite of the
fact that the Committee was alive and expressly referred to the
observations from the matter of Apoorva Vinay Nichle Versus
Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur and Others , 2011 (2)
Bom.C.R. 824, to substantiate the stand of undertaking a fresh
scrutiny, the impugned order is devoid of any objective material to
assess whether the inference regarding alleged fraud being drawn
by the Committee is plausible or otherwise.
7. As far as validity possessed by the petitioner's father,
there is not even a whisper as to the circumstances in which he
had obtained certificate of validity, by due process of law or
otherwise. The impugned order mentions about having orally
inquired with the petitioner's father and he having replied that he
was granted certificate of validity on the basis of the same record
which was referred to and relied upon by the petitioner's second
degree cousins Bhavana Yogesh Makhana and Harshal Yogesh
Makhana. In our considered view, the approach of the Committee
in perfunctorily discarding the validity possessed by the
petitioner's father is demonstrative of the arbitrariness and
perversity in the decision.
8. In order to satisfy ourselves, as to the manner in which
the certificate of validity was issued to the petitioner's father,
learned AGP is unable to place before us the original files of the
validity holder. The fact remains that the Committee is not refusing
to extend the benefit of the validity possessed by petitioner's father
on the ground that it was issued without following due procedure
of law or that there was no reasoned order.
9. Considering the aforementioned state of affairs, when
the petitioner is ready to run the consequences contemplated in
Shweta Balaji Isankar (supra), and in view of the fact that the
judgment and order is devoid of any scrutiny of father's validity
certificate, the petitioner albiet conditionally deserves to be issued
a certificate of validity.
10. The writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned
judgment and order dated 19.07.2023 passed by respondent no. 2
- Scrutiny Committee, is quashed and set aside.
11. Respondent no. 2 / Scrutiny Committee shall
immediately issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner as
belonging to ''Nhavi (108)' Other Backward Class in the prescribed
proforma.
12. The validity certificate of the petitioner shall be subject
to the outcome of the reverification to be undertaken by the
Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim
equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
Thakur-Chauhan/-
