Remanded

Yasmin Mahinoddin Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Aug 2016WP/2773/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay set aside the impugned order rejecting the petitioners' claim for a caste validity certificate. Relying on the precedent set in Apoorva Nichale, the court mandated that the Committee re-examine the case granting relief due to the real brother's prior approval via identical evidence.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 27th January, 2015 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Committee for a fresh decision within three months.

Yasmin Mahinoddin Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors. — Bombay HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

58-wp-2721-2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATTE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2721 OF 2015 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2773 OF 2015

¶4

Kamran Buranoddin Shaikh and Another ...Petitioners vs. State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents

¶5

...Respondents

¶6

Mr. R.S. Alange, for the Petitioner Mr. B. Kakade, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. A.B. Tajane, for Respondent No. 3

¶7

CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & MAKARAND KARNIK, JJ.

¶8

DATE : AUGUST 25, 2016

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

. Parties through their counsel.

¶11

The learned counsel for the Petitioners submit that the Petitioners' real brother was granted caste validity certificate by the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 10^th February, 2003 on the same set of evidence, however ignoring this aspect of the matter, the Petitioners' claim for caste validity certificate has been rejected by the Committee.

¶12

The learned counsel for the Petitioners has placed reliance

1/3

Vishal Parekar

58-wp-2721-2015

on the judgment passed in the case of “ Apoorva Vinay Nichale vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee and Others ” 2010(6) Mh.L.J., 401. He submits that in view of the law laid down in the said judgment the Caste Scrutiny Committee should not have ignored the Petitioners' claim for caste validation.

¶17

Keeping in view the fact that the Petitioners' real brother has been granted the caste validity certificate as also the law laid down in the case of “ Apoorva Nichale ” (supra), we set aside the impugned order dated 27^th January, 2015 passed by the Committee and remand the matter back to the Committee for taking a fresh decision keeping in view the law laid down in the aforesaid case.

¶18

The Petitioners to appear before the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 6^th September, 2016.

¶19

The Caste Scrutiny Committee to consider the Petitioners' case and take appropriate decision in accordance with law as directed above within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

2/3

Vishal Parekar

58-wp-2721-2015