Bombay High Court
Pravin S/O Ashokrao Nehare vs The Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate ... on 6 August, 2025
Author: M. S. Jawalkar
Bench: M. S. Jawalkar
2025:BHC-NAG:7690-DB
1/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3499 OF 2024
Pravin s/o Ashokrao Nehare
Aged about : 29 Years, Occu : Service; R/o
Prakash Nagar Colony, Building No. F-58/9,
Khaparkheda, Nagpur. ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, through its Member
Secretary and Deputy Director, Nagpur.
2. The Director,
Maharashtra State Power Generation
Company Ltd. (MAHAGENCO), 6th Floor,
Prakashgad Bandra (E), Mumbai.
3. The Chief Engineer
Maharashtra State Power Generation
Company Limited (MAHAGENCO),
Khaparkheda Thermal Power Station,
Khaparkheda, Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
Ms. Rashi Nagrare, Advocate h/f Mr. Ashwin Deshpande, Advocate for
Petitioner.
Mr. B. N. Mohta, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Mr. A. M. Joshi, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.
CORAM : SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR AND
PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
ARGUMENTS HEARD ON : JULY 24, 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : AUGUST 06, 2025.
2/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
JUDGMENT [PER PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.]
. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the
parties, Petition is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission.
2. By this Petition, Petitioner has challenged the order dated
29/1/2024 passed by the Respondent No.1/Scheduled Tribes Caste Scrutiny
Committee, Nagpur (for short, 'the Scrutiny Committee') , thereby rejecting the
caste claim of the Petitioner as 'Gond Gowari' Scheduled Tribe category and
cancelling and confiscating the Certificate dated 25/2/2019 issued by the Sub
Divisional Officer, Arvi, District Wardha. However, the Petitioner has restricted
his claim only for absorption on supernumerary post in terms of the
Government Resolution dated 14/12/2022.
3. It is undisputed fact that the Petitioner, after obtaining the caste
certificate of 'Gond Gowari' on 25/2/2019, applied for the post of 'Technician'
in pursuance of advertisement issued by the Respondent No.2. Accordingly by
following due procedure of law, Petitioner was selected against the post of
'Technician' on temporary basis vide appointment order dated 12/3/2021
against the seat reserved for Scheduled Tribe category.
4. The Petitioner joined the service with effect from 1/4/2021. As
3/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
per the appointment order, a specific condition was stipulated that
appointment of the Petitioner is subject to furnishing the caste validity
certificate. It is also made clear to the Petitioner that if the Petitioner failed to
furnish the caste validity certificate, his appointment will be treated as
cancelled. As such, with this understanding Petitioner started rendering service
with the Respondent No.3.
5. It is seen from the record that after the appointment, Petitioner's
caste claim was not forwarded immediately to the Scrutiny Committee.
Therefore, the employer issued communication dated 16/2/2023, and
accordingly, his caste claim was forwarded on 6/3/2023.
6. It is stated that as per the provisions of 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 (for short, 'the Act of
2000'), the burden is on the candidate to prove the caste claim before the
Scrutiny Committee, either on the basis of documents or on the basis of affinity
test. However, it seems that Petitioner failed to prove his caste claim before the
Scrutiny Committee, and accordingly, by order dated 29/1/2024 the
Respondent No.1/Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste certificate of the
4/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
Petitioner by holding that Petitioner failed to prove that he belongs to the caste
of 'Gond Gowari'.
7. As a consequence of invalidation of his caste claim, the
Respondent No.3 issued show cause notice to the Petitioner as to why his
services should not be terminated in terms of conditions stipulated in the
appointment order. The Petitioner failed to satisfy the Respondent No.3, and
accordingly, by order dated 19/11/2024 the services of Petitioner are
terminated.
8. It is seen from the record that at the time of issuing notices to the
Respondent, the statement of Petitioner was recorded that he is not pressing
the challenge to the order of Scrutiny Committee passed on 29/1/2024 and
restricted his claim for absorption on supernumerary post.
9. The Petitioner, in support of his claim, filed additional affidavit
dated 6/2/2025 and thereby relied upon the Government Resolution dated
14/12/2022 to get the benefit of absorption on the supernumerary post.
10. The learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 as well as the
learned AGP, in response to the notices issued by this Court, appeared in the
matter and strongly opposed the contentions made by the Petitioner. It is
5/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
stated on behalf of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 that appointment of the
Petitioner was on temporary basis from Scheduled Tribes category, and
therefore, no right has been accrued to the Petitioner on the post.
Furthermore, in the appointment order itself specific condition was stipulated
that in case Petitioner failed to furnish the caste validity certificate, his
appointment will be treated as cancelled. In such scenario, no question arose
to grant the benefit of Government Resolution dated 14/12/2022. Hence, it is
stated that Petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
11. We have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel
for both sides and perused the record as well as case laws pointed out by the
Petitioner.
12. In the present Petition, it is admitted fact that appointment of the
Petitioner was on temporary basis with clear understanding that in case
Petitioner failed to furnish the caste validity certificate, his appointment will be
treated as cancelled. As such, considering the nature of appointment, no right
was created in favour of the Petitioner, and consequently, Petitioner cannot
claim equity like to the employees granted by the State Government vide
Government Resolution dated 21/12/2019. Hence, considering the peculiar
6/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
facts of the present case, no case is made out for grant of benefit of absorption
on supernumerary post.
13. It will be relevant to mention herewith that the Hon'ble Apex
Court of India, in the case of Chairman and Managing Director, FCI and Others
V/s Jagdish Balaram Bahira & Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 8928 of 2015 along
with other connected Appeals, held that a person not belonging to specific
category or obtained the appointment by procuring a certificate, which found
to be invalid, meaning thereby a meritorious reserved candidate is deprived
from the benefit of reserved category for whom the post was reserved. Hence,
such person who failed to establish his caste claim, cannot be continued in
service, and accordingly, the person whose caste claim is invalidated, those
employees should be terminated.
14. In view of this Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, State of
Maharashtra had issued the Government Resolution initially dated
21/12/2019, whereby a system was created to identify the post of Scheduled
Tribes, where the Officers appointed could not get the caste certificate
validated and as a special measure and on humanitarian ground continued the
said Officers by creating supernumerary post on a temporary basis for eleven
months. But, here in the present case, the Petitioner has rendered the service
7/7 Judg.wp.3499.2024.odt
on temporary basis merely for a period of two years and his case does not fall
in the category, which State Government has created as a special measure.
15. It is further pertinent to note that at the time of appointment itself
Petitioner was aware of the consequences in case of invalidation of his caste
claim. Therefore, the person, who has obtained the appointment order with
clear understanding that in case he failed to furnish the caste validity
certificate, his services will be terminated, cannot be permitted to take the
benefit of Government Resolution dated 21/12/2019 as well as 14/12/2022.
16. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find merit in the
submission, and accordingly, the Petition which is devoid of the merit, is
hereby dismissed.
17. Rule is accordingly discharged. No order as to costs.
[PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.] [SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, J.]
vijaya
Signed by: A.S. GULANDE
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 07/08/2025 10:33:08
