Disposed

Ulhas S/O Kashirao Kale v. State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Amravati and 2 Others

Bombay HC5 May 2015WP/2318/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged termination of service for failure to submit caste validity certificate. Court directed submission of claim to Scrutiny Committee for verification within three weeks and, if accepted, for a decision within one year to assess protection of services.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to submit caste claim to Scrutiny Committee within three weeks; Committee to decide within one year.

Ulhas S/O Kashirao Kale Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

0505wp2318.14.odt

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2318/2014

¶5

Ulhas s/o Kashirao Kale ...Versus...

¶6

State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Amravati and others

¶7

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

Court's or Judge's orders

¶10

¶11

Shri M.V. Bute, Advocate for petitioner Mrs. K.S. Joshi, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2

¶12

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 05.05.2015

¶13

By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the respondent no.2, dated 31.7.2013 terminating the services of the petitioner for not submitting the caste validity certificate.

¶14

The petitioner was appointed by the respondent no.2 on the post of Talathi that was reserved for the Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner claims to belong to 'Mahadeo Koli' – Scheduled Tribe. Since the appointment of the petitioner was made in the year 1995, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service and then protect his services as he was appointed before the cut-off date.

¶15

Mrs. Joshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2 states that the services of the petitioner cannot be terminated unless his caste claim is verified by the respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee. It is stated that the petitioner had not submitted the necessary documents to the respondent no.2 for remitting his caste claim to

¶16

0505wp2318.14.odt

¶17

¶18

the respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee for verification. The learned Assistant Government Pleader relied on the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Arun s/o Vishwanath Sonone...Versus...State of Maharashtra and others , reported in 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457 to substantiate the submission that the services of the petitioner cannot be protected unless his caste claim is verified by the respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee.

¶19

Shri Bute, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would submit the necessary documents in respect of his caste claim to the respondent no.2 within a period of three weeks and the respondent no.2 may be directed to send the caste claim of the petitioner to the respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee for verification.

¶20

In view of the statements recorded hereinabove, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no.2 to submit the caste claim of the petitioner to the respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee for verification within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the same from the petitioner. The respondent no.3 – Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the caste claim of the petitioner as early as possible and positively within a period of one year from the date of receipt of the same as the petitioner's services are terminated in the year 2013.

¶21

In the circumstances, no order as to costs.

¶22

JUDGE JUDGE

¶23

Wadkar

Ulhas S/O Kashirao Kale v. State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Amravati and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ulhas S/O Kashirao Kale v. State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Amravati and 2 Others

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

Sau. Shama Ravindra Kalbande Vs Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Anothers

Shikshak Sahakari Bank Ltd. Vs Member, Industrial Court, Nagpur and Ors.

Shikshak Sahakari Bank Ltd. Vs Member, Industrial Court, Nagpur and Others

Ashok Ramrao Thakur, Buldhana Vs Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim, Amravati

Bapurao Shamrao Thote Vs Registrar General and Stamp Controller, State of Maharashtra, Pune and 2 Others

Maharashtra Rajya Shikshak Sena (Primary),District Branch,Thr. Working President, Tushar P. Anjanka Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary Ministry of Education, Mumbai and 4 Others