SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH
NITIN W. SAMBRE, ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
Samata Wamanrao Warudkar – Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1927 of 2014
Decided On : 15-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: S.R. Narnaware.
For the Respondents: N.S. Rao, J.B. Jaiswal.

Benefits obtained through false claims of caste cannot be protected, as it undermines the rights of genuine candidates.

Headnote:(A) 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 - Section 10 - The petitioner challenged the invalidation of her claim to belong to 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe by the Scrutiny Committee, seeking protection for her education and release of her certificates. The court found that the petitioner was aware of her provisional admission status and that her caste claim was not substantiated. (Paras 1, 4, 10, 14)

(B) Legal Principles - The court emphasized that benefits obtained through false claims cannot be protected, as it undermines the rights of genuine candidates. The principle of equity does not apply when the claim is found to be false. (Paras 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was issued a caste certificate in 1993, admitted to medical courses on a provisional basis, and later had her caste claim invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee. Despite completing her degrees, she was found not to belong to the claimed tribe.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to protection of her education due to her false claim of belonging to a reserved category.

Issues: The main issues included the validity of the caste claim and the implications of provisional admissions based on that claim.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that allowing benefits from a false claim would violate statutory provisions and harm the rights of genuine candidates.

Result: The writ petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the order dated May 27, 2011 passed by the respondent no. 5-Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur (for short, ‘the respondent no. 5-Committee’) whereby the claim of the petitioner of belonging to ‘Halba’ Scheduled Tribe came to be invalidated. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of directions to the respondents thereby ordering protection to the petitioner in her education to pursue studies in M.D. Anesthesia as a scheduled tribe candidate on an undertaking that she will not claim any benefit of belonging to a scheduled tribe.

2. The facts necessary for deciding the present writ petition are as under:

    The petitioner applied to the Executive Magistrate, Nagpur for issuance of a caste certificate and accordingly on July 31, 1993 she was issued a caste certificate of belonging to ‘Halba’ Scheduled Tribe. Based on the above status of belonging to the scheduled tribe category, the petitioner applied for grant of admission and accordingly admitted to a Science College against the seat reserved for the scheduled tribe category. The said Science College forwarded the claim of the petitioner for verification of the tribe claim.

3. The order of invalidation dated May 27, 2011 passed by the respondent no. 5-Scrutiny Committee was set aside in Writ Petition No. 1866 of 1998 on October 20, 2010 and the matter was remanded back to the respondent no. 5-Committee. It is the case of the petitioner that during the pendency of the said writ petition, the order impugned therein was stayed by this Court. As a sequel thereof, the petitioner was permitted to get an admission in the Government Medical College, Nagpur against a seat reserved for the scheduled tribe category. The petitioner thereafter informed to have completed her M.B.B.S. and by virtue of an interim order she was permitted provisionally to be admitted to the M.D. (Anesthesia) course. The petitioner has already completed the said course. The respondent no. 5-Committee again invalidated the claim of the petitioner on May 27, 2011 which has prompted the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition.

4. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner was appointed on June 03, 2011 as a Medical Officer with the Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital. The present writ petition was admitted by this Court on August 28, 2014. By way of an interim direction, the education of the petitioner was protected and the result of the petitioner of post-graduate course was directed to be declared. The petitioner accordingly continued to work as a Medical Officer and it is informed that as a one time measure, the Government is considering the claim of the petitioner of regularization of her services in the category of Medical Officer Class-II. Since the original degree certificate of M.B.B.S. and M.D. courses undertaken by the petitioner are not released till date, the petitioner is seeking release of the same and has also questioned the order of the respondent no. 5-Committee on merits on one hand and on the other hand, the petitioner is willing to give up her claim as of belonging to the scheduled tribe category.

5. In this factual background, Shri S.R. Narnaware, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the proceedings in relation to the issuance of caste validity certificate, under the interim orders of this Court the petitioner was granted provisional admission to M.B.B.S course which she has successfully completed. According to him, as per the admission rules, for post-graduate medical course for the Academic Session 2007-08 under the orders of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 1866 of 1998 this Court had taken a note of the fact that the petitioner was provisionally admitted to M.D. course which she has completed. He would claim that the petitioner was permitted to appear for the final year M.D. (Anesthesia) course on provisio

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top