2016 Supreme(Bom) 1103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
B.R. Gavai and V.M. Deshpande, JJ.
VIVEKANT S/o BHAIYAJI RAGHORTE – Petitioner
Vs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent
P.I.L. No. 91 of 2016
Decided On : 25-08-2016
For the Petitioner: S.R. Narnaware.
For the Respondent: S.M. Ukey.
The necessity for rules to be approved by the Legislature and preceded by previous publication, and the inability of a Government Resolution to supersede subordinate legislation without following due procedure.
Headnote:
Deputy Superintendent of Police - Abolishment of Post - 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 Rules, 2012, Act of 2000, Section 18 - The court discussed the conflict between the Government Resolution and Rule 12 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 Rules, 2012, and the Act of 2000, Section 18. It emphasized the requirement for rules to be approved by the Legislature and preceded by previous publication, and the inability of a Government Resolution to supersede subordinate legislation without following due procedure.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged a Government Resolution abolishing the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on the Vigilance Cell of the Scrutiny Committee for caste verification.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Government Resolution conflicted with the statutory rules and legislation, and emphasized the necessity for rules to be approved by the Legislature and preceded by previous publication.
Issues: Conflict between Government Resolution and statutory rules, the requirement for rules to be approved by the Legislature and preceded by previous publication.
Ratio Decidendi: A Government Resolution cannot supersede subordinate legislation without following due procedure.
Final Decision: The Government Resolution abolishing the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police was quashed and set aside.
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by Government Resolution dated 1-6-2016 to the extent it abolishes the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on the Vigilance Cell of the Scrutiny Committee established for the purpose of caste verification.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said Government Resolution insofar as it deletes the posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police, is in conflict with Rule 12 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 Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2012’). It is further the contention of the petitioner that the said is also in conflict with the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, reported in 1995 MhLJ Online 1 : AIR 1995 SC 94.
4. It is to be noted that, in the State of Maharashtra, there was no proper procedure prescribed for verifying claims of the candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, V.J.N.T. and Other Backward Class etc. Taking note of the same, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (cited supra) issued various guidelines. Their Lordships have directed constitution of a Committee and also directed that each Committee should be assisted by Vigilance Cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in overall charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims. The Vigilance Cell was directed to personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may be. The Vigilance Cell was also directed to examine the parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have knowledge of social status of candidate.
5. No doubt that the said directions were to hold the field till proper legislation was enacted. Subsequently, the Maharashtra Legislature has enacted “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 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2000”). It will be appropriate to refer to section 18 of the Act of 2000.
“18. (1) The Government may, subject to the previous publication, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out all or any of the purposes of this Act. (2) Every rule made under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be, after it is made, before each House of the State Legislature, while it is in session for a total period of thirty days, which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session in which it is so laid or the session immediately following, both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, and notify their decision to that effect in the Official Gazette, the rule shall, from the date of publication of such decision in the Official Gazette, have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done or omitted to be done under that rule.”
6. It could thus be seen that power is given to the State Government to make rules to carry out all or any of the purposes of the said Act. However, this power is subject to previous publication. Sub-section (2) of section 18 would clearly show that every rule made under the said Act is required to be placed before each House of the Legislature. Power is also given to the L