SUDHAKAR VITHAL KUMBHARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the order dated 5-5-1989 the respondent No. 2 ordered reversion of the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer (C) since it was found that the petitioner was wrongfully promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (C) against the quota reserved for B. C. Communities vide order dated 23-9-1987. This office order dated 5-5-1989 is impugned by the petitioner in the present writ petition.

(2.) MR. Mendadkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, urged that the petitioner was born in Maharashtra and the question whether he is migrant from Madhya Pradesh was not open to be decided by the employer, but could only have been determined by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims (For short "the Scrutiny Committee") and unless that claim was determined holding that the petitioner was not Schedule Tribe (S. T.) the order or reversion could not have been passed. In support of his arguments, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in (Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others), 1995 (2) Bom. C. R. (S. C.)690 : 1994 (6) Supreme Court Cases 241, another judgment of the Apex Court in (Union of India and others v. Dudh Nath Prasad), 2000 (1) Supreme 38 and the order of Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1562/2000 (Shri Needish Ashwin v. State of Maharashtra and others), decided on October 19, 2000.

(3.) PER contra Ms. Baxi, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 submitted that the petitioner is migrant to the State of Maharashtra and therefore not entitled to get the benefit of the S. C. and S. T. in the State of Maharashtra vide circular issued by the Government of Maharashtra on 10-5-1990. According to the learned Counsel, the said circular dated 10-5-1990 issued by the Government of Maharashtra is based upon the judgment of the Apex Court in (Merri Chandra Shekhar Rao v. Dean, Seth G. S. Medical College and others), 1990 (3) Supreme Court Cases 130. The learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 also relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in (Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Cases and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and another v. Union of India and another), 1994 (5) Supreme Courts Cases 244 and submitted that the order of reversion dated 5-5-1989 is legal and proper.