S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

Writ Petition No. 2091 of 2014

1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith.

2. These two Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenge the order passed withdrawing and cancelling a Non-Creamy Layer Certificate (“NCL certificate” for short) which was obtained by the Petitioner's parents in order to enable them to secure admissions in educational institutions, particularly, for the course in medicine against seats reserved for Other Backward Classes (“OBC”). It is common ground that in order to be eligible for such admissions, the candidate/student must satisfy the authorities that not only he belongs to an Other Backward Class notified as such for the State of Maharashtra together with other conditions but importantly he does not belong to a Creamy Layer. For establishing and proving that such a student/candidate does not belong a Creamy Layer but is a non-creamy layer candidate that a certificate is required to be obtained. That certificate has to be obtained on filling up the requisite application accompanied by an affidavit of the Applicant disclosing how he fulfills the criteria determined for obtaining such certificate. He has to affirm his affidavit and the particulars stated in such affidavit are capable of being verified and scrutinized even at a later stage. The competence and jurisdiction to hold such scrutiny and verification in order to satisfy that the certificate has not been obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, suppression of relevant and material facts is conceded in both these Petitions. What is projected is the manner in which the enquiry has been held in order to arrive at a satisfaction that the certificates were obtained by misrepresentation or suppression of a relevant and material fact. We would firstly refer to the facts in Writ Petition No. 2091 of 2014. That Writ Petition was filed in this Court on 28th February, 2014 and to challenge an order passed by the 6th Respondent to that Writ Petition dated 8th October, 2013 and all consequential steps and measures in furtherance thereof.

3. The Petitioner in that Writ Petition states that she is a citizen of India and domiciled in the State of Maharashtra. At the time of presentation of the Petition, she was undergoing a course in medicine particularly in the second year and which course is recognized and approved by the 3rd Respondent University. The admissions to this course are obtained by appearance at a Common Entrance Test and results of the same would decide the order of merit in which the name of the candidate like the Petitioner appears. Thereafter, the student/candidate is allotted a medical college and in a process styled as Common Admission Process. The Petitioner has been admitted by the 4th Respondent to this Writ Petition in the 5th Respondent's college. The 6th Respondent to this Writ Petition is the Collector of the Mumbai Suburban District. The Petitioner being the resident of Mumbai Suburban District, it is that Collector who is in-charge of issuance of such certificate either by himself or through his delegates duly authorized and equally empowered to hold a Inquiry as to whether the certificate is false or obtained by perpetrating a fraud or vitiated by misrepresentation or suppression of relevant and germane facts.

4. The Petitioner says that her father was employed by the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (“BPCL” for short). He was working as a Utility Operator in Labour Category equivalent to Class “C” of the Central Government Classification of ranks/posts of employees. The Petitioner's mother Nilima is a Teacher in a Municipal Corporation school. She belongs to a superior labour category. The case of the Petitioner is that her mother's income is less than the upper limit of the income criteria set up by the 1st Respondent-State in order to enable a OBC candidate to obtain NCL certificate. Thus, both parents are holding Class-C posts.

5.