The central legal point established in the judgment is that a person with a case based on falsehood has no right to approach the Court, and knowingly producing fabricated and fraudulent documents to substantiate a false claim constitutes playing fraud on the Court and the opposite party.

JUDGMENT

R.D.DHANUKA, J. - By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the order dtd. 27/8/2019 passed by the Respondent no.2 i.e. District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee invalidating the Caste Certificate. The petitioner also seeks order and direction against the Respondent no.2 to grant validity to the Caste Certificates dtd. 4/11/2016 issued by the Competent Authority to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner also seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the impugned Notification dtd. 6/1/2022 debarring/disqualifying the petitioner for 6 years from the date of the order for being elected or being a Councilor of the Respondent no.3. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :-

3. The petitioner had made an application for grant of Caste Certificate to the Competent Authority i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhiwandi. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner belongs to Muslim Julaha, an Other Backward Class (OBC) at Serial No.57 of the Government Resolution dtd. 13/11/1967 as amended from time to time.

4. The Competent Authority granted a Caste Certificate in favour of the petitioner certifying that the petitioner was Muslim Julaha, an OBC at Serial No.57 of the Government Resolution dtd. 13/11/1967.

5. The petitioner filed nomination paper for one of posts of Corporator/Councilor for the General Election of the Respondent Corporation and more particularly in respect of Ward No.78. The said post was declared to be reserved for other Backward Class Women. Nomination paper of the petitioner was declared valid by the Election Officer of the Respondent no.4. The election of the said post for the period from 2017 to 2022 was held on 12/2/2017. The petitioner secured the highest votes, representing the National Congress Party and was declared elected. The Respondent no.5 had also contested the election from the same ward representing a Political Party, Shiv Sena and was declared defeated and unsuccessful. The petitioner was required to submit the Validity Certificate of the Caste Certificate issued to the petitioner. The petitioner therefore, made an application to the Respondent no.2 along with the documents for validating the caste claim of the petitioner.

6. The Respondent no.5 filed a complaint/objection to the said application of the petitioner disputing the caste claim of the petitioner and passed an order dtd. 21/8/2017 and granted Validity Certificate to the petitioner.

7. Being aggrieved by the said order dtd. 21/8/2017 passed by the Respondent no.2 Committee validating the caste claim of the petitioner, the Respondent no.5 filed a Writ Petition bearing No.12122 of 2017 before this Court. This Court passed an order in the said writ petition on 12/6/2019 remanding back the matter to the Respondent no.2 Committee and the directed the Respondent no.2 Committee to consider various issues formulated by this Court in the said judgment.

8. The petitioner thereafter appeared before the Respondent no.2 Committee and filed their affidavit dtd. 9/7/2019 along with the documents and genealogical tree in support of her caste claim.

9. The Respondent no.2 Committee thereafter forwarded the said paper to the Vigilance Cell for enquiry on the issues as directed by this Court as per the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the said Act") and 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 (for short "the said Rules").

10. It is the case of the petitioner that the said Vigilance Officer accordingly visited native village of the petitioner and conducted home enquiry as well as school enquiry. According to the petitioner, the Vig