Disposed

Pushpa Baburao Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Feb 2019WP/2275/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenging termination of services due to delayed issuance of Caste/Tribe Validity Certificate by a Scrutiny Committee. Court directed Committee to dispose of proceedings within four months instead of terminating services.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner not to be terminated on account of failure to produce certificate; Committee to dispose of proceedings within four months.

Pushpa Baburao Thakur Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

907-WP-2275.2019.doc

¶2

suresh

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2275 OF 2019

¶5

Pushpa Baburao Thakur .... Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Others .... Respondents

¶6

Mr. R.K. Mendadkar for the Petitioner. Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.

¶7

CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 22, 2019

¶8

P.C:

¶9

Having heard both sides, we find that on 24-5-2011

¶10

the claim of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee at Nandurbar.

¶11

Mr. Kalel, who is appearing on behalf of respondent

¶12

Nos.1 & 2, says that he will ascertain from the Committee as to when the Committee will dispose of the proceedings pending

before it.

Page 1 of 3

907-WP-2275.2019.doc

suresh

We do not think that we should indulge the learned

¶18

AGP and grant him time, for we have repeatedly seen that the Committee does not perform its functions even within a reasonable time. There is no reason why this Committee should not have passed an order when the proceedings are pending before it for more than 7 years. On the earlier occasion this Bench has ensured that the Committees are provided with infrastructure and staff. Still, we find that it does not want to dispose of the pending proceedings and it only awaits orders and directions from the higher Court. It is only such matters which are taken up and disposed of. The rest of them remain pending.

¶19

It is on account of the approach of this Committee that everybody comes to this Court, either at its Principal Seat or Benches and prays for an out of turn hearing, otherwise a coercive action is awaiting them. In the circumstances, we find that this is one more instance where the Committee has delayed the proceedings and is acting unreasonably.

Page 2 of 3

907-WP-2275.2019.doc

suresh

Let the 3^rd respondent, therefore, not terminate the services of the petitioner only on the ground that the petitioner has failed to produce the Caste/Tribe Validity Certificate from the 2^nd respondent. The Committee should endeavour and dispose of the proceedings as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of four months from today, if not already disposed of.

¶24

With the above observations and direction, the petition is disposed of.

¶25

(M.S. KARNIK, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶26

Page 3 of 3

Pushpa Baburao Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpa Baburao Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Lalitha Genesan Vs University of Mumbai and 4 Ors.

Dr. (Mrs.) Sanghamitra Khatua Vs the University of Mumbai and 2 Ors. and Dr. Lalitha Ganesan (Applicant) and Anr.

Maruti Kallapa Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Prin. Secretary, School Edu. and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Deepak Inder Ahuja Vs the State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Deepak Inder Ahuja Vs the State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Mr. Mihir Girish Kamat Vs Maharashtra University of Health Sciences and Ors.