LAWS(BOM)-2011-11-48

AJAYKUMAR YADAORAO NIKHAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA MUMBAI

Decided On November 11, 2011
AJAYKUMAR YADAORAO NIKHAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER dated 16/10/2004 passed by Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidating caste claim of petitioner as belonging to Halba scheduled tribe forms subject matter of challenge in this matter. Impugned order is under Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis) Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act,2000?referred to as Act no.23 of 2001 hereafter. Petitioner has sought that caste certificate on 9/3/1983 & contested election as councilor of Municipal Council, Bhandara on 22/1/2002 against a reserved seat. Because of this invalidation, Collector had declared him disqualified on 6/11/2004 and it was recalled on 22/11/2004 as this Court on 11/11/2004 stayed the order of Scrutiny Committee. Thereafter, during pendency of this petition & because of orders dated 29/11/2004 in it, he has been elected again in January,2007 as scheduled tribe candidate on the strength of same caste certificate & current tenure is due to expire on 2012.

(2.) IN this background, we have heard Adv. Narnaware for petitioner, Adv. Patil for respondent 2 Scrutiny Committee, Adv. Kaptan for respondent 6 & Shri Kale, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 & 3

(3.) AFFINITY test has also not been rightly applied and material supplied on behalf of the petitioner to vigilance authorities on 28.07.2003 has not been properly evaluated. The only consideration is the remark of Research Officer dated 29.07.2003 where he records that traits do not match. Para 12 of writ petition and judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gayatrilaxmi B. Nagpure vs. State of Maharashtra, reported at AIR 1996 SC 1338 are relied upon. It is further contended that the allegations of malafides are not rebutted and even the contention in writ petition that finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee are perverse, has not been denied. According to him, the approach of Scrutiny Committee in the matter has been too casual. The judgment in the case of(wrong citation ?) reported at 2009 ALL MR (SC Reporter) 193, para 115 is stated to be relied upon for said purpose.