Back
2014 Supreme(Bom) 2292
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
R.V. Ghuge, J.
Sunita - Appellants
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 11507 of 2014
Decided On : 18.12.2014
For the Appellant :Ajinkya Reddy, Advocate
For the Respondents: G.K. Naik Thigle, Additional G.P.
The main legal point established is that a previous judgment validating a caste claim can allow a nomination, and the rejection without a summary inquiry under Rule 11 is unsustainable. The court also emphasized the importance of facilitating the election process.
Headnote:
Caste Validity - Election Nomination - Maharashtra Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959 - Summary inquiry under Rule 11 - Judgment of Division Bench - Caste Validity Certificate - Election Process
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a nomination paper for a Gram Panchayat election, claiming to belong to a Scheduled Tribe. The nomination was rejected due to the absence of a Caste Validity Certificate. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment validating her caste claim.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the previous judgment validated the petitioner's caste claim, allowing her nomination. The rejection of the nomination without a summary inquiry under Rule 11 was unsustainable.
Issues: Validity of nomination without Caste Validity Certificate, application of Rule 11, and the impact of the previous judgment on the election process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the previous judgment validated the petitioner's caste claim, allowing her nomination. The rejection without a summary inquiry under Rule 11 was unsustainable. The court also emphasized the importance of facilitating the election process.
Final Decision: The court quashed the rejection of the nomination, directed the issuance of a Caste Validity Certificate, and ordered the formal declaration of the petitioner's election as a member of the Gram Panchayat.
R.V. Ghuge, J.
1. Rule.
2. By consent of parties, Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. This matter was heard for quite sometime on 16.12.2014 and was posted today in order to enable the learned Advocate for the State Election Commission Shri S.T. Shelke to gather certain details so as to address this Court.
4. The facts of this case are peculiar. The Petitioner has filed the nomination paper for contesting the election to the post of a member of the Gram Panchayat, Kalambar (Khurd), Post Kalambar (Khurd), Taluka Loha, District Nanded. The said nomination form was filed as against the vacant position of a member of the Gram Panchayat from Ward No.2 which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe category.
5. The Petitioner claims to be belonging to Mahadev Koli tribe which is a Scheduled Tribe. She has been issued with the Caste Certificate dated 14.06.1990 by the Tahasildar & Executive Magistrate, Udgir, District Latur in accordance with the provisions of law as they stood prior to the introduction of the 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.
6. My attention is invited to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 11.08.1994 delivered in Writ Petition No.2451/1994 filed by the Petitioner versus the State of Maharashtra and others. The Petitioner was aggrieved by the rejection of her claim as belonging to Mahadev Koli (Scheduled Tribe) by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. It was brought to the notice of the Division Bench that the same Committee has validated the caste claim of the real brother of the Petitioner, namely, Shivaji Ganpatrao Kabade. The caste claim of another real brother of the Petitioner, namely, Subhash Ganpatrao Kabade was also held to be valid as belonging to Mahadev Koli (Scheduled Tribe) by the Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 19/20th June, 1986 in Writ Petition No.438/1985.
7. The Division Bench of this Court by the said judgment dated 11.08.1994 has set aside the order of the Respondent No.3 Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidating the caste claim of the Petitioner and held that the Petitioner belongs to Mahadev Koli (Scheduled Tribe). Rule was accordingly made absolute.
8. The Petitioner, therefore, contends that she was armed with the judgment of this Court dated 11.08.1994 as well as a copy of the writ that was issued by this Court on 11.08.1994. She has annexed these documents to her nomination form and therefore, has made a categoric declaration that she belongs to Mahadev Koli (Scheduled Tribe) and is therefore, eligible to contest the election from Ward No.2 which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe category.
9. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed on 09.12.2014 by the Respondent No.4/ Tahasildar & Returning Officer, Loha, rejecting her nomination form. It is submitted that the elections are scheduled on 23.12.2014 and the Petitioner was the sole candidate for contesting the position of a member of the Gram Panchayat from Ward No.2. As of today, there is no other candidate who has filled in the nomination form from the said ward.
10. The Petitioner contends that since the order of invalidating her caste claim was quashed and set aside, consequentially her claim of belonging to Mahadev Koli (Scheduled Tribe) stood allowed. As such, her validation claim is construed to have been allowed. It is, therefore, stated that the moment the invalidation order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee was set aside, it was incumbent upon the said Committee to thereby put its record straight pursuant to the judgment of this Court and as such, issue the caste validity certificate sheerly as a consequence of the judgment of this Court. The Petitioner, however, concedes that though the Caste Scrutiny Committee did not do so, the Petitioner was not seriously affected as she was armed with the judgment of
