Allowed

Mahesh Prakash Somwanshi v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC20 Jan 2012WP/763/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Bombay ordered the Caste Scrutiny Committee to accept caste verification applications filed by petitioners before January 21, 2012, for contesting Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti elections, relying on a previous judgment that declared certain State Government circulars illegal.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Scrutiny Committee to accept caste verification applications filed by January 21, 2012.

Mahesh Prakash Somwanshi Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Election Law | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 763 OF 2012

¶5

Mahesh Prakash Somwanshi

¶6

....Petitioner.

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶9

....Respondents.

¶10

Mr. Vinod P. Patil, Advocate for petitioner.

¶11

Mr. V.D.Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 to 5.

¶12

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 764 OF 2012

¶13

Sou. Sushilabai w/o. Subhash Patil

¶14

....Petitioner.

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶17

....Respondents.

¶18

Mr. Vijay Y. Patil, Advocate for petitioner.

¶19

Mr. V.D. Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 to 5.

¶20

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 766 OF 2012

¶21

Magan s/o. Jawaharlal Jadhav

¶22

....Petitioner.

¶23

Versus

¶24

Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division,

¶25

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

Aurangabad and Ors.

....Respondents.

Mr. Sagar S. Phatale, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.D. Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶30

WITH

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO. 767 OF 2012

¶32

Nirmalabai Gowardhan Bhil

¶33

....Petitioner.

¶34

Versus

¶35

The State of Maharashtra

¶36

....Respondents.

¶37

Mr. Vinod P. Patil, Advocate for petitioner.

¶38

Mr. V.D.Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 to 5.

¶39

WITH

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO. 768 OF 2012

¶41

Shilpa w/o. Dhammapal Gaikwad

¶42

....Petitioner.

¶43

Versus

¶44

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶45

....Respondents.

¶46

Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for petitioner.

¶47

Mr. V.D.Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶48

WITH

¶49

WRIT PETITION NO. 779 OF 2012

¶50

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶51

¶52

Mangalabai w/o. Nivrutti Patil

¶53

....Petitioner.

¶54

Versus

¶55

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶56

....Respondents.

¶57

Mr. M.K. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioner.

¶58

Mr. V.D.Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 & 5.

¶59

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 780 OF 2012

¶60

Nivrutti s/o. Dhama Patil

¶61

....Petitioner.

¶62

Versus

¶63

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶64

....Respondents.

¶65

Mr. M.K. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioner.

¶66

Mr. V.D.Godbharle with Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 & 5.

¶67

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATED : 20th January, 2012.

¶68

PER COURT :

¶69

These petitions were mentioned by the learned counsel

¶70

appearing for petitioners for urgent hearing at 2.30 p.m. today before this Court, as according to learned counsel, the Division

¶71

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶72

¶73

Bench Presided over by Justice B.R. Gavai was not available.

¶74

The learned counsel appearing for petitioners placed before us copy of order passed in group of petition [WP Nos. 625/12 and others).

¶75

The learned counsel for petitioners pray for directions to the Scrutiny Committee to accept their applications for verification of the caste status, on the basis of which, the petitioners intend to file the nomination for contesting the elections of Zilla Parishad/ Panchayat Samiti. Last date for filing nomination paper, according to the learned counsel, is 23rd January 2012.

¶76

The learned A.G.P. Shri. Godbharle appearing for the State has placed on record copy of the order passed by the Division Bench presided over by Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mohit S. Shah at the Principal seat of Bombay High Court on 19th January 2012 in a bunch of petitions (WP No. 547/12 & others) on 19th January 2012. The said order reads as under :-

¶77

"For the reasons separately mentioned, the following order is passed :

¶78

¶79

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶80

ORDER

¶81

(i) In the result, we hold that the impugned circulars dated 20.9.2011, 7.10.2011 and 17.11.2011 of the State Government is in the Social Justice and Special Assistance Department stipulating cut off dates for making applications under subsection (1) of section 6 of the Caste Verification Act, 2000 (Maharashtra Act No. 5 of 2009) are illegal.

¶82

(ii) However, since the petitioners have approached the court very late and the election process has already commenced, we decline to give any consequential directions, but we do clarify that in case the Collector of the concerned district accepts any such application made under subsection (2) of section 6 of the Caste Verification Act, 2000 it is for the concerned Collector to decide whether, having regards to the paucity of time and the various election duties with which the Collector is entrusted, he would consider such applications at this stage within any time frame. Since the Collector is the Officer entrusted by the Election Commission with various onerous and emergent duties, we would not issue any further directions to the Collectors of the respective districts except that in case a Collector decides to consider any applications which he may receive for any such caste validity certificates

¶83

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶84

¶85

from prospective candidates, the Collector shall consider such applications by following the rational norms and not pick and choose any application arbitrarily.

¶86

(iii) We further make it clear that the adinterim order passed on 13.1.2012 in Writ Petition Nos. 383 of 2012, 384 of 2012 and 385 of 2012 on 13th January 2012 as well as the other orders passed thereafter will have to be read in light of the above final directions.

¶87

(iv) The petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms."

¶88

After considering the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perusing the relevant orders placed before us, we pass the following order.

¶89

O R D E R

¶90

(i) In case the petitioners file applications for verification of their caste claim before the respondent - Caste Scrutiny Committee by 21st January 2012, then we direct the Committee to accept the applications of the petitioners. It is made clear that we have not provided any outer limit for the Committee, to decide the applications filed by the petitioners, finally.

¶91

WP Nos. 763,764,766,767,768,779 & 780/12

¶92

¶93

(ii) The Collector, the Scrutiny Committee shall take into consideration the order passed by the Principal Seat of Bombay High Court on 19th January 2012 for the said purposes. The petitions are disposed of accordingly.

¶94

Authenticated copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶95

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

¶96

ssc/

Mahesh Prakash Somwanshi v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Prakash Somwanshi v. the State of Mah 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

Bajaj Auto Limited Vs Badri Sakharam Patil

Bajaj Auto Limited Vs Dattu Pralhadrao Sagar

Bajaj Auto Limited Vs Dattu Pralhadrao Sagar

Shankar Bhagwan Ambhore Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Satish Ramchandra Salunke Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Madanlal Lalchand Jain Vs the State of Mah and Anr.