Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Abdul Basit S/O Abdul Salam Qureshi vs The District Caste Certificate ... on 31 July, 2018

Author: Z.A. Haq

Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari, Z.A. Haq

   Judgment                                                                 wp4128.18
                                             1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


                      WRIT PETITION  NO.  4128 OF  2018.


  Abdul Basit s/o Abdul Salam,
  "Qureshi", aged about 19 years,
  Occu - Student, resident of 
  Gorakshan Ward No.33,  Near
  Azad Vyavam Shall, Wardha.                          ...   PETITIONER.


                                       VERSUS


  The District Caste Certificate Scrutiny
  Committee, through President,
  Samajik Nyay Bhavan, Laxminagar,
  Railway Station Road, Wardha.                       ...   RESPONDENT.


                                       -----------
                Shri  P.A. Abhyankar, Advocate for the petitioner.
                     Shri  N.R. Patil, AGP for the respondent.
                                      ----------- 


                                        CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
                                                  AND Z.A HAQ, JJ.

                                        DATE    : JULY 31, 2018.


  ORAL JUDGMENT :  (Per -  Z.A. Haq, J).

Heard Shri P.A. Abhyankar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri N.R. Patil, learned A.G.P. for the respondent. ::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2018 01:06:42 :::

Judgment wp4128.18 2

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. The petitioner has challenged the decision of the respondent Scrutiny Committee, by which his caste claim to the effect that he belongs to Other Backward Class, has been rejected and the Caste Certificate issued by the Competent Authority is confiscated.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has pointed out page no.20 i.e. copy of birth entry of son born to Rehman Qureshi. According to the petitioner Rehman Qureshi was great grand father of the petitioner. The copies of documents placed on record of the Writ Petition at page no.21 (Partition deed dated 13.03.1962), is also pointed out which shows reference to word 'Qureshi', after the name Subhedar. It is submitted that this Subhedar Qureshi, was real brother of grand father of the petitioner.

5. It is submitted that Ku. Ayesha d/o Mohammad Saleem Qureshi, cousin sister of the petitioner, is granted validity certificate upholding her claim as belonging to O.B.C. It is fairly submitted that the petitioner had not included name of Ku. Ayesha in the genealogical tree submitted before the Scrutiny Committee. ::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2018 01:06:42 :::

Judgment wp4128.18 3

6. Learned A.G.P. has not been able to point out any entry on the basis of which it can be said that the conclusions of two members of the Committee rejecting the claim of the petitioner, can be said to be justified.

7. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has rightly submitted that in the facts of the case, it was obligatory on the part of the Committee to undertake the exercise as per Rules and call for the report of Vigilance Cell.

8. In the facts of the case, in our view, the interests of justice would be sub-served by passing the following order.

ORDER

(i) The impugned order dated 05.06.2018 passed by the respondent Scrutiny Committee is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh decision, according to law.

(ii) The petitioner to appear before the respondent Committee on 05.09.2018, and to abide by its further instructions in the matter.

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2018 01:06:42 :::

    Judgment                                                                         wp4128.18
                                                   4


             (iii)             The   respondent   Committee   shall   undertake   the

exercise and take a fresh decision in the matter within one year.

(iv) Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. In the circumstances of the case, parties to bear their own costs.

                         JUDGE                            JUDGE
                                                        

  Rgd.




::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2018                                ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2018 01:06:42 :::