Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 1933
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
R.K. DESHPANDE, M.G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
(SUO MOTU) Courts on its own motion - Applicant
Versus
K.M. Bhoyar, Research Officer & Member Secretary and others - Respondents
CRIMINAL APPLICATION SUO MOTU NO. 16 of 2017 Arising out of CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 538 of 2016 (D)
Decided On : 13-12-2017
For the Applicant : Shri A.M. Deshpande, Additional Public Prosecutor
For the Respondents:Shri Sunil Manohar, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri A.A. Naik, Advocate., Shri S.B. Wahane, Advocate.
Proper maintenance of records and adherence to procedural requirements by quasi-judicial authorities is crucial to ensure the validity and integrity of their decisions.
Headnote:
Caste Claim - Caste Certificate Scrutiny - Sec. 195/Sec.340 Cr.P.C. - The judgment and order dated 23-3-2017 quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 19.01.2016 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, remanding the caste claim for fresh consideration. The court issued directions to all Scrutiny Committees in Maharashtra to maintain Roznama, date and sign orders, and show dates of dispatch and acknowledgment of communication of orders in the Roznama.
Fact of the Case:
The court allowed the writ petition challenging the order invalidating the caste claim, remanding it for fresh consideration. The respondents were issued notice for inquiry into the fabrication of the order-sheet by the Scrutiny Committee members.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Committee failed to follow proper procedure in dating and signing the judgment, leading to confusion and the need for directions to be issued to all Scrutiny Committees in Maharashtra.
Issues: Validity of the caste claim, fabrication of the order-sheet, and compliance with procedural requirements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of dating and signing judgments, and issued directions to ensure uniform practice of maintaining Roznama and passing orders by all Scrutiny Committees in Maharashtra.
Final Decision: The proceedings were dropped due to the reasons stated above.
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Writ Petition No.538 of 2016 challenging the order dated 19-1-2016 passed by the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.2 at Akola, invalidating the caste claim of one Sanjay Bhaskar Raimulkar, was allowed by this Court by the judgment and order dated 23-3-2017. The operative portion of the order passed by this Court is reproduced below:
“(i) The impugned order dated 19.01.2016 passed by the Respondent No.2Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
(ii) The caste claim of the petitioner is remanded to the respondent no.2Committee for a fresh consideration of material on record on merits and in accordance with law.
(iii) The Committee shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondents and pass a reasoned order within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order.
(iv) The parties to appear before the respondent No.2Scrutiny Committee on 10th April, 2017.
(v) Civil Application Nos. 1227/2016, 1564/2016 and 1779/2016 do not survive. They are also disposed of.
(vi) Notice to show cause issued to the three Committee members who have signed the second order sheet dated 31.12.2015 and the impugned order, is made returnable on 24.04.2017.
(vii) Registry to register separate proceedings in that respect.
(viii) Records of present petition, records of Writ Petition No.1800/2014 with Civil Application No. 24/2016 therein, shall be preserved for use in Sec.195/Sec.340 Cr.P.C. proceedings.
(ix) Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms. However there shall be no order as to costs.”
3. In response to the aforesaid order, the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3, who are the members of the Scrutiny Committee, were issued notice on 23-3-2017, alleging therein as under :
“Whereas, Criminal Application U/S 340 with Section 195 of Cr.P.C. For inquiry in respect of fabrication of order-sheet (Roznama) dated 31-12-2015 by the three Scrutiny Committee Members thereby showing an attempt to interfere with the sanctity of the records of a quasi judicial authority. The order-sheet (Roznama) dated 31.12.2015 demonstrates the dishonesty on the part of the Committee Members who signed the Roznama at a later stage, which prima facie constitute an offence U/S 192 & 193 of I.P.C.
(SUO MOTU) Criminal Application is registered on 04.04.2017 as per Hon’ble Court’s order dated 23.3.2017.”
4. The respondents have appeared before this Court and filed their reply on affidavit. The respondent No.3, the Chairman of the Committee, filed his separate affidavit dated 4-12-2017, whereas the respondent No.1, the Research Officer and Member-Secretary of the Committee, filed his affidavit dated 11-12-2017. Paras 5 and 6 of the affidavit filed by the respondent No.1 reflecting the stand taken by him, are reproduced below :
“5. It is submitted that the respondent is the Research Officer and is not well versed with legal procedure. In place of writing a separate order-sheet, the Members of the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee wrote below the Roznama dated 31.12.2015 that the matter was decided and the caste claim was found to be invalid. It is most respectfully submitted that in hindsight the respondent realized that the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee ought to have written a separate order-sheet. However, the respondent and Shri Jadhav made an endorsement before the Roznama dated 31.12.2015 by stating that the said noting were made L/O, which means 'later on'. The respondent has clearly stated that the said endorsement was made 'later on'. There was no intention to create any misleading impression. Also there was no intention to favour anyone or to affect anyone adversely. The respondents have realized the mistake committed by them after the decision of the Division Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court and tender unconditional apology for the same.”
“6. It is submitted that the procedure followed by the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee is that they hear the par
