Sushil S/O Rajendra Thakur And Others vs The Sub-Divisional Officer, Daryapur, … on 10 March, 2025

0
20

Bombay High Court

Sushil S/O Rajendra Thakur And Others vs The Sub-Divisional Officer, Daryapur, … on 10 March, 2025

Author: Avinash G. Gharote

Bench: Avinash G. Gharote

2025:BHC-NAG:2382-DB
                                             -- 1 --                 WP 7081.2024 (J).doc




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                         WRIT PETITION NO. 7081 OF 2024

            1) Sushil S/o Rajendra Thakur
               age : 38 years, Occ : Labour
            2) Swaroop S/o Sushil Thakur
               age : 6 years, through natural
               guardian father petitioner No.1
            3) Tushar S/o Rajendra Thakur
               age : 40 years, Occ : Service
            4) Prasad S/o Rajendra Thakur
               age : 34 years, Occ : Service                  .. Petitioners
            5) Sandip S/o Rajendra Thakur
               age : 32 years, Occ : Service
               All R/o Samruddhi Nagar,
               Opp. New Teacher's Colony,
               Dhamandari Buldhana,
               Dist.Buldhana

                               Versus

            1) The Sub-Divisional Officer,
               Daryapur, Dist. Amravati
            2) The Deputy Director/Member                    .. Respondents
               Secretary Scheduled Tribe Certificate
               Scrutiny Committee, Amravati

          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Ms. Preeti Rane, Advocate for petitioners.
                Mr. S.V. Narale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.
          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            CORAM        :     AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND
                                               ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

                            DATE        :       MARCH 10, 2025

          ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Abhay J. Mantri, J.)

Heard. Rule. Heard finally, by the consent of the learned

counsel appearing for the parties.


                                                                             PAGE 1 OF 5
                                   -- 2 --                   WP 7081.2024 (J).doc




(2)           The petition questions the orders dated 15/05/2024

(Annexures 4 to 8) passed by the respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional

Officer, Daryapur, refusing to grant certificates to the petitioners of

belonging to “Thakur”, Scheduled Tribe on the ground that petitioners

failed to satisfy the affinity test, also on the point of area restriction.

These orders have been confirmed by the respondent No.2 Scheduled

Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee (for short -‘ the Committee’) in

appeal/Thakur-5 No.05/2024 by its decision dated 28/08/2024

(Annexure 17).

(3) The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently

contended that the respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer exceeded its

jurisdiction and, without considering the provisions laid down in Rule 4

of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes (Regulation of Issuance and

Verification of) Rules, 2003, erred in refusing to grant caste certificates

to the petitioners. The respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer is not

permitted to make a detailed enquiry while issuing a caste certificate.

Therefore, refusing to grant a caste certificate by the respondent No.1

Sub-Divisional Officer is illegal and bad in law and contravenes the

Rules and Regulations of 2003. Also, the findings recorded by the

respondent No.2 Committee & confirmed that orders are illegal. The

respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer, as well as respondent No.2

Committee, has not considered the fact that the petitioners have

produced caste certificates of their ancestors and a validity certificate

PAGE 2 OF 5

— 3 — WP 7081.2024 (J).doc

issued in favour of their blood relative, namely, Bhushan Thakare, and

therefore urged for allowing the petition.

(4) Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not disputed

the proposition of law that the respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer

has no authority to make a detailed enquiry of the claim of the

petitioners and, therefore, submitted, to pass appropriate orders.

(5) We appreciate the submissions and have perused the

impugned orders and record.

(6) It is settled position of law that the competent authority

under Section 4 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 Act, 2000 (hereinafter

referred to as ‘Act of 2000’) while issuing caste certificate is not

entitled to make a detailed enquiry as to the validity of the claim of the

petitioners of belonging to particular Caste/Tribe; for that is the job of

the Committee constituted under Section 6 of the said Act.

(7) A perusal of the impugned orders dated 15/05/2024

(Annexures 4 to 8) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, who is the

competent authority in terms of Section 4 of the Act of 2000, would

indicate that he has gone into the question of validity of the claim of

PAGE 3 OF 5

— 4 — WP 7081.2024 (J).doc

the petitioners, which is impermissible in law. Thus, it seems that the

Sub-Divisional Officer exceeded its jurisdiction while refusing to grant

caste certificates to the petitioners. Similar is the position in respect of

the order dated 28/08/2024 passed by the respondent No.2 the

Committee. The respondent No.2 Committee has not considered the

documents produced on record by the petitioners in their proper

perspective.

(8) Apart from this, the position in this matter is no longer

res integra, but it is covered by the judgment of this Court in Namdeo

s/o. Baburao Ingale and ors. vs. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate

Scrutiny Committee, Amravati [2015(2)Mh.L.J.707], Dhanashree

Ravindra Koli and others V/s The state of Mah. & ors. in

W.P.No.8829/20021 decided on 12/08/21 and followed subsequently

in Vishal Namdeo Gopewad vs. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate

Scrutiny Committee, through its Member / Secretary, Yavatmal and

another [W. P. No.4335/2023 decided on 01/09/2023] , in view of

which, the impugned orders dated 15/05/2024 passed by respondent

No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer, as well as the decision dated 28/08/2024

passed by the respondent No.2 Committee, are hereby quashed and

set aside.

(9) The respondent No.1 Sub-Divisional Officer is directed to

issue caste certificates in favour of the respective petitioner by

PAGE 4 OF 5

— 5 — WP 7081.2024 (J).doc

following the procedure under Section 4 of the Act of 2000 and Rule 3

of the Rules, 2003, within a period of four weeks from the date of

receipt of the copy of this judgment. The writ petition is allowed

accordingly.

(10) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.





                                [ ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.]            [ AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.]




                     KOLHE




Signed by: Mr. Ravikant Kolhe                                                          PAGE 5 OF 5
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 10/03/2025 16:58:54
 



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here