Partly allowed

Vrushali Purushottam Sawale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC24 Jan 2023WP/645/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment declares a petition procedure for determining a petition against the State of Maharashtra. The court directs the committee not to reject a claim on a spelling mistake in the caste certificate and allows the petitioner to submit a corrected version if already obtained. Directions include setting a timeline for decision and ensuring services are not terminated

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting the claim was quashed and remitted. The petitioner allowed to submit corrected certificate. Decision deadline fixed.

Vrushali Purushottam Sawale Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

645.23wp

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.645 OF 2023

¶5

SMT. VRUSHALI PURUSHOTTAM SAWALE

¶6

VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶7

Mr S. R. Barlinge, Advocate for petitioner; Mr P. S. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 2

¶8

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND

¶9

SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 24^th January, 2023

¶11

PER COURT:

¶12

This is yet another instance of the Committee, rejecting the claim of a candidate on the ground that there is a spelling mistake in the description of the Caste/Tribe set out in the certificate issued by the Competent Authority. Recently, we have delivered a Judgment dated 15/12/2022 in Writ Petition No.12624/2022, directing the Committee, not to close the validation proceedings when there is a spelling mistake in the Caste/Tribe certificate. They should give an opportunity to the candidate to get a corrected certificate and proceed with the proceedings at the stage, at which they have been paused. We have also directed the

¶13

645.23wp (2)

¶14

State Government to educate all it’s authorities to ensure that, they will not commit a spelling mistake in the Caste/Tribe of a candidate while issuing the certificate.

¶15

In the present case, “Tokre Koli” has been spelt as “Tokare Koli”.

¶16

Since this issue pertains to the petitioner and the Committee, and the Employer of the petitioner would have no role to play in this controversy, we are not issuing notice to respondent No.3.

¶17

Taking into account the conspectus of the matter, this petition is partly allowed, with the following directions :-

¶18

(a) The impugned order dated 16/02/2022 is quashed and set aside. The Case No. CVC/NDB/Ser/1212/ CR-1195/DII(2) stands remitted to the Competent Committee at Dhule (erstwhile ‘Nandurbar Committee’).

¶19

(b) The petitioner has already received the corrected Scheduled Tribe certificate. She would tender the original certificate to the Competent Committee, on or before 03/02/2023 and receive an acknowledgment.

(3)

645.23wp

‘[email protected]’ and her registered Mobile Number as ‘7506372277’. The Committee can, therefore, enter into correspondence with the petitioner on her E-mail address and her registered Mobile Number.

¶24

(d) The Committee would decide the claim of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, on or before 30/06/2023. The petitioner would render wholehearted cooperation and would refrain from seeking adjournment on unreasonable or trivial grounds, lest, the Committee would be justified in progressing to the next stage in the proceedings.

¶25

(e) The services of the petitioner would not be terminated till her claim is decided by the Committee untill 30/06/2023, or till the date of the delivery of the order, whichever is earlier.

¶26

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶27

sjk

Vrushali Purushottam Sawale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vrushali Purushottam Sawale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

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

Asraruddin Riyazuddin Vs Zilla Parishad Jalgaon through Chief Executive Officer

Ashok Charan Chavan and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Vilash Motiram Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Jai Hanuman Shikshan Prasarak Mandal through Its President Gandharibai Masnaji Mundakar Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Ambadasrao Warpudkar Bahu Uddeshiya Dhanya Adhikosh Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Pathara and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Satish Dattu Katale Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others