RAMESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Due to limited arguments and controversy presented before us which centers around scope and relevance of Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificate Act, 2000 ( hereafter referred to as "the Act No. 23 of 2001" for short) in present matters, we state facts having bearing on it briefly. Both the petitioners are real brothers and by identical orders passed on 25/06/2007, the Caste Scrutiny Committee functioning under above Act has invalidated their caste claim and confiscated their caste certificates as belonging to Halba scheduled tribe. It has also directed their discharge from employment and recovery of benefits derived by them because of said caste certificates. It has also authorized Deputy Superintendent of Police of the Vigilance Cell with it to lodge complaint in the form of FIR with concerned police station as per Section 11(2) for offenses punishable under Section 11(1)(a) and (b) of the said Act. It also found that action also needed to be taken against the Executive Magistrate under Section 13 of the Act No. 23 of 2001, as he issued initial certificate without due verification.

(2.) Shri M.G. Bhangde, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners in both matters seeks liberty to raise issue of seniority of petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3029/2007 in future if occasion therefor arises, as he has retired. In this background, he has contended that new offence or disability/disqualification, envisaged under Section 10 and Section 11 of the Act No.23 of 2001 cannot have any application in present facts, as both the petitioners had obtained their caste certificates before 1980. He points out that petitioner - Ramesh in Writ Petition No. 3029/2007 has now superannuated and he was appointed on 10.10.1979 against a reserved post for Scheduled Tribe. His younger brother Vilas who happens to be petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3288/2007 is appointed similarly on 01.10.1985. He contends that the Act No. 23 of 2001 has come into force more than 20 years after the initial certificate of caste was obtained by these petitioners. He relies upon express language used in these sections to show that word employed therein is "secures" and not "has secured". Contention is, therefore, words expressly contemplate prospective application of this statutory provisions which is also in consonance with Article 14 and Article 20 of the Constitution of India. To substantiate this contention, he is relying upon the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court (State of Maharashtra .vrs. Kaliar Koil Subramaniam Ramaswamy, 1977 3 SCC 525); (Soni Devrajbhai Babubhai .vrs. State of Gujarat and others, 1991 4 SCC 298) and (Ganesh Gogoi .vrs. State of Assam, 2009 7 SCC 404) where the provisions of Article 20[1] of Constitution of India have been construed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

(3.) Shri Thakre, learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent - State Government and Shri N.W. Sambre, learned Counsel appearing for respondent - Scrutiny Committee and other respondents have supported the directions issued by the Scrutiny Committee. Attention is invited to material looked into by it before issuing such directions. It is contended that the material demonstrates a culpable mind and therefore, the directions have been issued. Shri Sambre, learned Counsel contends that even in absence of provisions like Sections 10 and 11 of the Act No.23 of 2001, similar action is possible under relevant provisions of Indian Penal Code and Constitution of India. He therefore, argues that no new disability or disqualification is created by said Act and technical objection being raised are misconceived. He further contends that protection on the basis of the Government policy dated 15.06.1995 extended by the State Government is not relevant for the purpose of considering the action under Sections 10 and 11 of the Act No.23 of 2001. He therefore, prays for dismissal of both the writ petitions.