Allowed

Annayabai Tippaji Dokale v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC8 Aug 2017WP/5544/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ relief after the Scrutiny Committee invalidated her Scheduled Tribe caste certificate, alleging lack of opportunity of hearing. The High Court quashed the committee's order and remitted the matter for a decision in accordance with law and natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Order of the Scrutiny Committee directing invalidation of the caste certificate is quashed and set aside; matter remitted for fresh decision after opportunity of hearing.

Annayabai Tippaji Dokale Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

{1}

¶2

wp5544.17.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 5544 OF 2017

¶5

Smt. Annayabai w/o Tippaji Dokale age 45 years, occ. household & member R/o Karkheli, Tq. Dharmabad Dist. Nanded Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra Through District Collector Nanded

¶8

Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Division Aurangabad Respondents

¶9

Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, A.G.P. for both respondents.

¶10

CORAM : R.M.BORDE &

¶11

S.M. GAVHANE, JJ. DATE : 8^th AUGUST, 2017

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R.M. BORDE, J. )

¶13

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

¶14

Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶15

wp5544.17.odt

¶16

{2}

¶17

Petitioner claims to be belonging to "Koli Mahadeo" Scheduled Tribe. Caste certificate issued to the petitioner by the competent authority came to be referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The Scrutiny Committee, however, has directed invalidation of the caste certificate on the ground that the certificate issued to the petitioner does not appear to have been issued by the office of the Tahsildar, Biloli since there is no entry recorded in the register in respect of issuance of certificate on the relevant date. As such, inference has been drawn by the Scrutiny Committee that the certificate has not been issued by the proper authority and therefore, the Committee proceeded to direct invalidation of the caste certificate. Petitioner contends that she has not been extended an opportunity of hearing by the Committee before taking adverse decision. Had the petitioner been given an opportunity, she could have explained the circumstances and could have persuaded the Committee to take proper view.

¶18

Since adverse decision has been taken by the Committee without observing principles of natural justice, the same deserves to be set aside. The decision rendered by the Scrutiny Committee directing invalidation of the caste certificate issued in favour of petitioner is quashed and set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the Scrutiny Committee for taking decision in accordance with the provisions of law and after extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Scrutiny Committee shall hear the petitioner and take appropriate decision in observance of the procedure prescribed in that behalf, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today and, it is

¶19

wp5544.17.odt

¶20

accordingly directed. Rule made absolute to the extent specified above. No costs.

¶21

( S.M. GAVHANE ) ( R.M.BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶22

dyb

Annayabai Tippaji Dokale v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annayabai Tippaji Dokale v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Sunil Sambhaji Patil and Others Vs the Union of India and Others

Ayub Hamja Shaikh Vs the Collector Latur

Basweshwar Amarendra Swami Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sominath Trimbak Rahane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ashti Taluka Milk Produce and Supply Co. Operative Society through It Managing Director M L Dhanawad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Madhavrao Sambhaji Birajdar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others