Bombay High Court
Omsingh Gopalsingh Chavan vs Divisional/District Caste ... on 18 January, 2018
Author: Vasanti A Naik
Bench: Vasanti A Naik
WP 5462/17 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 5462/2017
Omsingh Gopalsingh Chavan,
Aged 57 years, occupation Service,
R/o C/o Kadarlavar, Near Church at
Post Sironcha, District Gadchiroli. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. Divisional/District Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee No.1, Amravati.
Through its Secretary.
2. Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli,
Through its Chief Executive Officer.
3. Agriculture Development Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli. RESPONDENTS
Shri A.C. Dharmadhikari, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Shyam Bissa, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1.
Shri H.A. Deshpande, counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3.
CORAM :SMT.VASANTI A NAIK AND
A.D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATE : 18 TH JANUARY, 2018.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, J.)
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the scrutiny committee, dated 11.07.2017 rejecting the claim of the petitioner of belonging to Rajput Bhamta VJ-A. ::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/01/2018 00:59:15 ::: WP 5462/17 2 Judgment
3. The petitioner was appointed on a post earmarked for VJ-A category and his caste claim was referred to the scrutiny committee for verification. The scrutiny committee has invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by the impugned order dated 11.07.2017.
4. Inter alia, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is illegal and is liable to be set aside as the scrutiny committee has not applied the affinity test and has not considered whether the petitioner has proved his affinity to Rajput Bhamta VJ. It is submitted that since the scrutiny committee was not satisfied with the documents tendered by the petitioner in support of its caste claim, it was all the more necessary for the scrutiny committee to have considered whether the petitioner proved his affinity to Rajput Bhamta VJ.
5. Shri Bissa, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the scrutiny committee and Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3, are not in a position to point out anything in the order of the scrutiny committee to show that the scrutiny committee had considered the vigilance report to find out whether the petitioner could prove his affinity to Rajput Bhamta VJ. ::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/01/2018 00:59:15 :::
WP 5462/17 3 Judgment
6. Since the caste claim of the petitioner was rejected as in some of the documents the caste of the relatives of the petitioner was not recorded as Rajput Bhamta but was recorded as Rajput, it was necessary for the scrutiny committee to have applied the affinity test while deciding the caste claim of the petitioner.
7. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the scrutiny committee for deciding the caste claim of the petitioner, afresh in accordance with law. The services of the petitioner would remain protected till his caste claim is decided.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/01/2018 00:59:15 :::