IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(P. V. Hardas and R. M. Savant, JJ.)
ANITA d/o RAMRAO HIMGIRE and another -Petitioners.
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and others -Respondents.
W. P. No. 64 of 2001
Decided on 8-11-2006. (Aurangabad)
Advocate Appeared
For petitioner: S. P. Urgunde holding for S. B. Talekar
For respondent-State: K. M. Suryawanshi, AGP
(Paras 5,9 and 10)
(b) Constitution of India, Article 226-Invalidation of caste claim--Writ jurisdiction- --Interference into invalidation of caste claim not warranted when the documents based on which the validation of of caste is claimed are not beyond suspicion--Pending petition since petitioner had completed degree courses invalidation would have not adverse effect on same, however, petitioners would not be entitled to claim benefit of caste henceforth.
(Para 7)
R. M. SA V ANT, J. :- By this Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners are challenging the order dated 21-11-2000 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad invalidating their caste claim as belonging to "Lingder" which is a Scheduled Caste.
2. Such of the facts which are necessary for adjudication of the above matter are narrated herein below :-
The petitioners after passing the 12th Standard Examination are prosecuting studies in BHMS and MBBS course in the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 colleges. Since the petitioners had secured admission on the basis of belonging to the Lingder Scheduled Caste, the caste certificates of the petitioners were forwarded to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification. One of the petitioners approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 4692 of 1999 seeking a direction that the Caste Scrutiny Committee be directed to complete the verification proceedings in respect of the caste certificate issued to the said petitioner within a particular time frame. This Court by order dated 21-10-1999 directed the Caste Scrutiny Committee to consider the caste claim of the said petitioner on the basis of the caste certificate submitted along with the application dated 20-9-1999 after giving her an opportunity as provided.
The Caste Scrutiny Committee thereafter proceeded to determine the caste claim of both the petitioners above named and vide its order dated 28-8-2000 invalidated the caste claim of the petitioners. The said order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee was challenged by both the petitioners by filing Writ Petition being Nos. 4143 of 2000 and 3128 of 2000 which were disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court (Chandrachud, J.) by his order dated 10-10-2000. Since the Petitions were filed on the ground that the material produced by the petitioners had not been considered by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the learned Single Judge had directed the Caste Scrutiny Committee to take into consideration the said documents and also granted liberty to the petitioners to file further documents if they so desire. Since the petitioners were already admitted to BHMS and MBBS Course the said admissions were made subject to the result of the Caste Scrutiny. On remand of the matter by the learned Single Judge vide his order dated 10-10-2000 the petitioners appeared before the Caste Scrutiny Committee and filed originals of the documents on which reliance was placed by them in support of their caste claim. The Caste Scrutiny Committee has exhaustively considered the said documents and has arrived at a conclusion that the petitioners have failed to prove their caste claim as belonging to Lingder caste and therefore has invalidated the caste certificates issued to the petitioners by the impugned order dated 21-11-2000.
3. In the above petition 'Rule' came to be issued and in view of the interim orders granted by this Court the petitioners have pursued their studies, for . the BHMS and MBBS course and we are now informed that they have completed the said courses. We have heard the learned counsel Shri Urgunde for the petitioners and Shri Suryawanshi learned AGP for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioners Shri Urgunde while challenging the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee has made two fold submissions. It was firstly contended by the learned counsel that the Caste Scrutiny Committee failed to take into consideration that the petitioners have produced as many as eight documents which were prior to the year 1950 i.e. before the issuance of the Presidential order and therefore the said documents had great probative value. In support of the said contention the learned counsel has relied upon judgment reported in 2006(7) Mh.L.J. 1 = 2006(4) All MR page 131, Rajesh Gode vs. State of Maharashtra and 2002(3) MhLJ. 290, Sarangappa vs. State of Maharashtra. Both the said judgments lay down that the documents which are prior to the Presidenti
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.