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 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Miss. Riya Ashok Zade vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, ... on 28 August, 2019

Author: Sunil B. Shukre

Bench: Sunil B. Shukre, Milind N. Jadhav

                                                                 925.wp6850.18.odt
                                       1/5



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

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 6850 OF 2018

        Miss. Riya Ashok Zade
        Aged about 18 years,
        Occ.: Student,
        R/o. Mu. Post Chacher,
        Tah. Mauda,
        Distt. Nagpur 441106                 .... PETITIONER
                                    // VERSUS //
1.      State of Maharashtra
        Through Secretary,
        Ministry of Social Justice and
        Welfare Department,
        Mantralaya,
        Mumbai.
2.      District Caste Scrutiny Committee,
        Nagpur, Through its Chairman,
        Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Samajik Nyaya
        Bhavan, 2nd Floor, Wing-B, Before Govt.
        I.T., Shrashhananda Peth, Dikshabhoomi
        Road, Nagpur.
3.      Director
        Technical Education
        State of Maharashtra, Mumbai
        3, Mahapalika Marg, Patra Peti No. 1967,
        Mumbai - 01
4.      Principal
        Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering
        and Management, Nagpur
        Ramdev Tekadi, Gittikhadan,
        Katol Road, Nagpur - 440013
5.      Registrar
        Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj,
        Nagpur University, Civil Lines,
        Nagpur 440 001.                      .... RESPONDENTS




     ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2019                   ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2020 22:19:56 :::
                                                                         925.wp6850.18.odt
                                              2/5



__________________________________________________________________________
Ms. Shilpa G. Barbate a/w Mr. P.A. Jibhkate, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. T. Khan, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
Mr. Purushottam Patil, Advocate for respondent No. 5.
__________________________________________________________________________

                          CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                  MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.

                          DATE          : 28.08.2019.


ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.]

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

2. The petitioner claims her caste to be "Kirad", which is Nomadic Tribe recognized by the State of Maharashtra. However, in her application submitted for verification of caste certificate, she mentioned her caste as "Kirat", which is a sub-caste of the caste "Bhoi". Some of the documents, which were submitted to the District Caste Scrutiny Committee - respondent No. 2 by the petitioner disclosed that her caste was "Kirad". There was a doubt about "Kirad" caste being synonymous with the sub-caste "Kirat" and therefore, the matter was referred for clarification to the State but, no clarification came and ultimately, the caste claim of the petitioner was returned by the Scrutiny Committee and the petitioner has come before us in ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2020 22:19:56 :::

925.wp6850.18.odt 3/5 now the present petition claiming restoration of her application on the file of respondent No. 2 and its consideration in accordance with law.

3. During pendency of this petition, the State of Maharashtra issued a Government Resolution dated 01.08.2019 clarifying the issue. It is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. The Government Resolution clarifies that both sub-castes "Kirat" and "Kirad" can be treated as sub-castes of the caste "Bhoi". This means that the castes "Kirat" and "Kirad" have been considered by the State as synonyms having treated as synonymous of each other and part of the caste "Bhoi". Caste "Bhoi" is a recognized Nomadic Tribe.

4. In view of issuance of the clarification vide Government Resolution dated 01.08.2019, the application of the petitioner would be required to be restored and considered, in accordance with law. However, there is one more aspect, which is required to be borne in mind by the Scrutiny Committee. Government Resolution dated 01.08.2019 has been challenged for its validity in Writ Petition No.932/2019 filed by Bhoi Divar Samaj Vidyarthi Kalayankari Bahuuddeshiya Sanstha, Nagpur Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. and in this petition, a co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court has, by way of interim ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2020 22:19:56 :::

925.wp6850.18.odt 4/5 order, directed that if any validity certificates are issued for "Kirad" caste, endorsements therein shall be inserted to the effect that the certificates would be subject to the result of the petition. This dimension of the case would also have to be considered by respondent No. 2 - Committee. The order of the Division Bench is taken on record and is marked 'Y' for it's identification.

5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and Application No. Edu-1/1577/2017-2018 of the petitioner is directed to be restored to the original file of respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the aforesaid application and decide the caste claim of the petitioner, keeping in mind the interim order passed on 06.08.2019 by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.932/2019 and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 12 months from the date of this order. Till then, there shall be interim protection to the education being pursued by the present petitioner, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall give an undertaking to the College Authorities that in case, caste claim of the petitioner is invalidated, she shall pay the difference of the fees within three months calculated, by treating the petitioner as candidate from the `Open Category', within three months from the date of invalidation. The ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2020 22:19:56 :::

925.wp6850.18.odt 5/5 undertaking shall be submitted within two weeks from the date of the order, failing which the interim protection granted to the petitioner shall stands cancelled without any reference to this Court.

6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

                                          JUDGE                          JUDGE

Prity G.




           ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2019                 ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2020 22:19:56 :::