In a writ petition contesting a caste certificate, the High Court held that the Scrutiny Committee correctly relied on the Vigilance Cell's favorable report regarding the candidate's OBC status pursuant to Supreme Court precedent, and dismissed the petition.
Petition dismissed; Rule discharged with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1606 OF 2004
Shri Ishtiak Ahmed Abdul Aziz ...Petitioner
v/s.
Anis Ahmed Usman Gani & ors. ...Respondents.
Mr.P.B.Shah for the Petitioner.
Mr.R.K.Mendadkar for Respondent No.1.
Mr.C.R.Sonawane, AGP for State.
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH&
V.M.KANADE, JJ.
DATED:26TH MARCH, 2008
P.C.:
1. By this petition the Petitioner challenges the
order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee holding
- 2 -
that the caste certificate issued in favour of the
Respondent No.1 that he belongs to ’Momeen’ (OBC)
caste is valid. The Petitioner was the candidate who
contested the election of Municipal Council against
the Respondent No.1. The scrutiny committee has
passed an order on the basis of the report submitted
by the vigilance cell. When the certificate issued
in favour of the Respondent was referred to the
scrutiny committee for verification, they referred it
for inquiry as required by the judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil &
Anr. v/s. Addl.Commissioner, Tribal Development and
Ors. (1994) 6 SCC 241. The vigilance cell, to whom
the matter was referred for enquiry, after holding
inquiry submitted a report in favour of the candidate
that his claim that he belongs to Momeen (OBC) caste
is valid. Accepting that report the committee made
the order that the certificate issued in favour of
the Respondent No.1 is valid.
2. In our opinion, this order made by the scrutiny
committee is completely in consonance with the
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari
Madhuri Patil (supra), where the Supreme Court has
categorically held that if the report submitted by
- 3 -
the vigilance cell is in favour of the candidate,
then nothing more is required to be done and the
Scrutiny Committee has to hold that the claim is
valid. We, therefore, see no reason to set aside the
order impugned in the petition. Petition, therefore,
fails and is dismissed. Rule discharged with no
order as to costs.
(D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)
(V.M.KANADE, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee confirming the validity of the respondent's caste certificate based on the vigilance cell report should be set aside?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kumari Madhuri Patil & Ors. v/s. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors.Applied¶15
Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. v/s. Addl.Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors. (1994) 6 SCC 241 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Ishtiak Ahmed Abdul Aziz
Anis Ahmed Usman Gani
State
D.K.Deshmukh
V.M.Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court