Allowed

Sau Gayabai Rekmagad Phad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC15 Dec 2011WP/6785/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging denial of caste certificate. Court, following a prior judgment, directed the Committee to issue a validity certificate recognizing the petitioner's caste as Vanjari Vimukta Jati-Nomadic Tribe (D).

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No. 2 to issue validity certificate to petitioner recognizing her caste as Vanjari within two weeks.

Sau Gayabai Rekmagad Phad Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

WP No. 6785/09

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 6785 OF 2009

¶5

Sau Gayabai w/o. Rukmagad Phad, Age 54 yrs., Occu. Service, R/o. Yeldarcolony, Parbhani.

¶6

....Petitioner.

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra (Through Secretary, Social Welfare Dept., Mantralaya, Mumbai.)

¶9

Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No. 1, Aurangabad Divn, Aurangabad. For VJNT (N.T.D.) Spl.B.C., O.B.C. ....Respondents.

¶10

Mr. Vivek Bhavthankar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent No. 1. Mr. B.L. Sagar Killarikar, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶11

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATED : 15th December, 2011.

¶12

ORAL ORDER :

¶13

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.

¶14

The petitioner claims to be belonging to "Vanjari" recognized as Vimukta Jati- Nomedic Tribe (D). Her caste claim

¶15

WP No. 6785/09

¶16

¶17

was verified by the respondent No. 2 - Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Committee decided the matter by order dated 16.8.2009. The Committee consists of three members. Out of them two members being Secretary and Member opined in favour of grant of validity certificate, whereas the Chairman of the Committee was of the opinion to invalidate the caste claim of the petitioner.

¶18

Such orders were subject matters of adjudication by this Court where out of three members of the Committee, two members opined in favour of caste claim and one was against it.

¶19

Considering the stand adopted in earlier matters, we are of the view that the petitioner deserves to be issued validity certificate. Shri. Bhavthankar, learned counsel for petitioner, places reliance on the judgment of this Court [Coram : B.R. Gavai & M.T. Joshi, JJ.] dated 8th September in WP No. 3738/2001 and other connected matter . We have perused the same.

¶20

We direct the respondent No. 2 - Committee to issue validity certificate to the petitioner mentioning her caste as "Vanjari" recognized as Vimukta Jati-Nomadic Tribe (D) within two weeks from today. Rule is made absolute in above terms.

¶21

WP No. 6785/09

¶22

¶23

Authenticated copy of this order be provided to Mr. S.K. Kadam, learned A.G.P. to act upon.

¶24

[ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] [ NARESH H. PATIL, J.]

¶25

ssc/

Sau Gayabai Rekmagad Phad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sau Gayabai Rekmagad Phad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangameshwar Sugar Limited through Chairman Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.

Vishwanath Raghunath Dubukwad and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rukhmin Raghunath Jadhav Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Kakasaheb Rajendra Mane Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Raju Asaram Pawar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Ahmed Bauminya Haranmare Vs the Zlla Parihad Latur through Its Chief Executive Officer and Ors.