Bombay High Court
Shaikh Mohamed Mubashir Mohd. Yousuf vs The State Of Mah And Anr on 23 January, 2024
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2024:BHC-AUG:2098-DB
(1) wp-8101-2012.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.8101 OF 2012
Shaikh Mohamed Mubashir s/o Mohd. Yousuf,
Age: 22 years, Occ: Student,
R/o. Omer Colony, Degloor Naka, Nanded,
Tq. & Dist. Nanded. ..Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through it's Secretary,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The S.C., V.J., N.T., O.B.C. & S.B.C.
Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.2, Aurangabad Region, Latur. ..Respondents
...
Mr. P. V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. N. S. Tekale, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.
DATED : 23rd JANUARY, 2024.
JUDGMENT (Per: S. G. Chapalgaonkar, J.):
-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of
the parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of
admission.
2. The petitioner approaches this Court under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India impugning order dated 27.06.2012 passed by
respondent no.2- S.C., V.J., N.T., O.B.C. & S.B.C. Divisional Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.2, Aurangabad Region, Latur.
3. Mr. Jadhavar, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner
would submit that the petitioner belongs to 'Pinjari' community, which
is recognized as Other Backward Class. The Competent Authority has
issued caste certificate to that effect in his favour. While petitioner was
(2) wp-8101-2012.odt
pursuing his education, proposal for verification of the caste claim was
forwarded to respondent no.2-Committee, which was supported by the
documents like school leaving certificate, school admission extract and
caste certificate. The respondent no.2-Committee referred petitioner's
proposal for vigilance enquiry. On receipt of the vigilance report, the
Committee issued show cause notice as to why his claim shall not be
invalidated, as on the basis of prima facie material surfaced in vigilance
enquiry, the claim of the petitioner does not get support. The petitioner
filed detail reply alongwith documents which includes the school
admission register in respect of his father for the year 1961, wherein
the caste is recorded as 'Pinjari'. The Headmaster of the school has
communicated the aforesaid fact to the Vigilance Officer and further
confirmed that the entry in the school record is flawless. However, the
Committee did not consider impeccable material and invalidated the
caste claim of the petitioner on the ground that no evidence prior to
13.10.1967 has been tendered in support of caste claim.
4. Mr. Tekale, learned AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2
supports the order passed by the Committee and contends that
adequate reasons have been recorded by committee in impugned order
while invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner.
5. We have considered the submissions advanced by the
respective parties. We have perused the original record of the
proceedings before the Committee. We could see communication dated
19.09.2008 addressed by the Headmaster, Zilla Parishad High School,
Ghungarala, Tq. Naigaon, Dist. Nanded to Police Inspector, Vigilance
Cell of the Committee. The Headmaster has certified that the father of
the petitioner namely Shaikh Mohd. Yousuf Mohd. Hussain was
admitted to the school on 20.09.1961, and his caste has been recorded as
'Musalman (Pinjari)'. The entry in the school admission register is un-
(3) wp-8101-2012.odt
tampered. We have perused copy of school admission register certified
by the Headmaster. The entry in the name of petitioner's father can be
seen, with caste as 'Musalman (Pinjari)'. The date of admission is
20.09.1961. Further details are duly filled in. On prima facie
consideration of the aforesaid material, we do not find that the aforesaid
document is manipulated or tampered. However, it was for the
Committee to form opinion during the course of hearing based on
report of the vigilance cell.
6. Perusal of the impugned order depicts that the Committee
nowhere refers the aforesaid documents. The findings of the Committee
is based on six documents enlisted in the order. The Committee records
that the applicant failed to produce any documents prior to 13.10.1967
i.e. the date of Notification declaring 'Pinjari' to be the Other Backward
Class. We find that the observations of the Committee and final
conclusion is in ignorance of the vital piece of evidence regarding school
admission register dated 20.09.1961 in respect of father of the
petitioner. In view of the aforesaid observations, we deemed it
appropriate to set aside the impugned order and relegate the matter to
the Committee for fresh consideration in light of the document dated
20.09.1961 i.e. school admission register entry of the petitioner's father.
Hence, we proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
a. Writ Petition is partly allowed.
b. The impugned order dated 27.06.2012 passed by respondent no.2-
S.C., V.J., N.T., O.B.C. & S.B.C. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.2, Aurangabad Region, Latur is hereby quashed and set
aside.
(4) wp-8101-2012.odt
c. The matter is relegated back to the Committee for fresh
consideration of the petitioner's caste claim for 'Pinjari', Other
Backward Class, particularly in light of the school admission register
depicting the entry of caste of petitioner's father. The committee shall
be at liberty to investigate in to genuineness of document with
assistance of Vigilance cell.
d. The Committee shall be free to record its own finding as regards
to the aforesaid document and also examine any other document
tendered by the petitioner in support of his caste claim and pass fresh
order in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise be carried
expeditiously and in any case within a period of six months from the
date of this order.
e. The petitioner shall appear before the Committee on 15.02.2024
and submit documents, if any, in support of his caste claim and shall co-
operate for early disposal of the proceeding before the Committee.
f. Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
g. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Devendra/January-2024
