Partly allowed

Pratap S/O Dhanraj Naikda v. Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Buldhana and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Jan 2012WP/2884/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee to verify the petitioner's Scheduled Tribe caste claim within six months. The order continues status-quo on the petitioner's services pending the committee's decision, partly allowing the writ petition regarding termination notice.

What did the court decide?

Scrutiny Committee directed to verify caste claim within 6 months; petitioner directed to appear on 2.2.2012; services protected pending decision.

Pratap S/O Dhanraj Naikda Vs Chief Executive… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

12.01.12.WP2884.11.odt

¶2

1/3

¶3

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

¶4

Writ Petition No.2884/2011

¶5

[Pratap Dhanraj Naikda .vrs. Chief Executive Officer and others]

¶6

..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND

¶8

P.D. KODE, JJ.

¶9

DATE : JANUARY 12, 2012.

¶10

Heard finally with the consent of Shri D.I. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. M.P. Munshi, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 and Shri T.R. Kankale, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.4.

¶11

The Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee entrusted with the job of verification of caste claim of Scheduled Tribe (Naikda) at Amravati is permitted to be joined as respondent no.4. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Learned AGP waives notice for added respondent no.4.

¶12

The petitioner has joined employment in

¶13

12.01.12.WP2884.11.odt

¶14

2/3

¶15

1999 as reserved category candidate and his caste claim forwarded by his employer namely respondent nos.1 and 2 for verification, still appears to be pending with respondent no.4.

¶16

Advocate Munshi states that she is still awaiting instructions in this respect. The petitioner approached this Court assailing the notice of termination dated 26.4.2011 and 29.4.2011. This court has already granted status-quo on 23.6.2011 and he, therefore, continuous in service.

¶17

In this situation, interest of justice can be met with by directing respondent no.4 Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously complete the verification of his caste claim. Accordingly, respondent no.4 Scrutiny Committee is directed to complete the exercise of verification in accordance with the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, DeNotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (Maharashtra Act No. XXIII of 2001) within a period of 6 months from the date on which the petitioner appears before that

¶18

12.01.12.WP2884.11.odt

¶19

3/3

¶20

Committee. We direct the petitioner to appear before that Committee on 2.2.2012 and to abide by its further instructions in the matter. The orders protecting the services of the petitioner shall continue to operate till the Scrutiny Committee takes further appropriate decision in this respect. Thus, the petition is partly allowed. No costs.

¶21

JUDGE JUDGE

¶22

Gulande

Pratap S/O Dhanraj Naikda v. Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Buldhana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratap S/O Dhanraj Naikda v. Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Buldhana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Purushottam S/O Pandurang Kotangale Vs State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O. Armori

Pawan S/O Mithulal Beriya Vs President, Washim Nagar Parishad and 2 Others

Shri Prem Dayal S/O Radheysham Gupta Vs the Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited, Nagpur and Another

Sumit S/O Marotisingh Bilgaye Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Ors.

Radheshyam S/O Mahadeorao Zade Vs the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur and 2 Others

Prashant S/O Bapurao Nawale Vs the Chief Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. and 3 Others