Disposed

Prabhavati Babasaheb Kombade v. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Thr Member Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Aug 2012WP/7079/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by a Forest Guard seeking protection from termination while his Scheduled Tribe certificate verification was pending. The court directed the scrutiny committee to dispose of the application within six months and stayed termination of his services.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 1 to decide caste verification within six months; stay on termination of petitioner's services.

Prabhavati Babasaheb Kombade Vs Scheduled… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

wp7079.12

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.7079 OF 2012

¶6

Prabhavati Babasaheb Kombade,
Age-21 years, Occu:Service,
R/o-Choramba, Tq-Dharur,
Dist-Beed,
At present R/o- Forest Office,
Nanaj, Tq-Solapur,
Dist-Solapur.
...PETITIONER.

¶7

1) Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad, Through its Member Secretary,

¶8

2) Chief Conservator,
 Forest, Pune,
 Sy. No.49, Vanvasahat,
 In Front of Naren Hill
 Apartment, Wanwadi, Pune,

¶9

3) Divisional Forest Officer, M.P.A. Nanaj, Tq. & Dist-Solapur. ...RESPONDENTS.

¶10

 ...
 Shri.S.S. Phatale Advocate for Petitioner.
 Shri. P.P. More Advocate for Respondent
 No.1.
 Shri.V.D. Godbharle, A.G.P. for Respondent
 Nos. 2 and 3.
 ...

¶11

wp7079.12

¶12

¶13

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND
 S.S. SHINDE, JJ.

¶14

 DATE : 27TH AUGUST, 2012.

¶15

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.] :

¶16

1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and

¶17

heard finally by consent. Shri. More, learned
counsel waives notice for Respondent No.1. Shri.
Godbharle, learned A.G.P. waives notice for
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶18

2.The Petitioner contends that he belongs
to "Koli Mahadev", Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner

¶19

was appointed on 7th January, 2012, as a Forest
Guard. The Petitioner, at present, is in service
of Respondent No.3. It is contended by the learned

¶20

counsel appearing for the Petitioner that
Petitioner's proposal for verification of caste,
is pending with Respondent No.1 Caste Scrutiny
Committee.

¶21

wp7079.12

¶22

¶23

communication by Respondent No.2, Exhibit "E",

¶24

dated 2nd August, 2012, the Petitioner approached
this Court apprehending termination of his
services for non production of caste validity
certificate.

¶25

4.Shri. More, learned counsel appearing for
RespondentNo.1ScrutinyCommittee,on

¶26

instructions, submits that within six months from
today, caste verification proposal of the
Petitioner would be finally disposed of, on its
own merits.

¶27

5.We direct the Respondent No.1 Scrutiny

¶28

Committee, to decide caste verification proposal

¶29

of the Petitioner, within SIX MONTHS from today,

¶30

on its own merits. The Petitioner undertakes to

¶31

co-operate with Scrutiny Committee in final
disposal of his caste verification proposal. The

¶32

wp7079.12

¶33

¶34

Petitioner undertakes to appear before the

¶35

Scrutiny Committee on 3rd September, 2012 at 11.00
a.m.

¶36

6.For a period of SIX MONTHS, Petitioner's

¶37

services shall not be terminated on account of non
production of caste validity certificate.

¶38

7.All issues are kept open. We express no

¶39

opinion on the merits of the caste claim of the
Petitioner.

¶40

8. Rule is made absolute on the terms

¶41

indicated above.

¶42

9.Authenticated copy of this order be

¶43

provided to the learned counsel for the

¶44

Petitioner.

¶45

[S.S. SHINDE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.]

¶46

asb/AUG12

Prabhavati Babasaheb Kombade v. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Thr Member Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhavati Babasaheb Kombade v. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Thr Member Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babasaheb Genuji Dhas Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kishor Babulal Tulsibagwale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shrikant Gangadhar Bagul Th Power of Att Petitonr 2 and Ors. Vs Pravara Sahakari Bank Ltd. Head Office Loni Dist a.Nagar

Sandip Gulabrao Patil Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Vasant Janardhan Thete Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shaikh Ziyauddin Shaikh Ajimouddin Vs the Union of India and Ors.