BHIKAMSINGH CHATARSINGH SAPKAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By order dated 6.8.2007 the Apex Court set aside the order passed by this Court on 16.6.2004 and remitted the matter to this Court for considering it afresh.

(2.) After remand by the Apex Court, affidavit in reply was filed on behalf of respondent no.2 on 29.1.2008. In para 7 of the said reply it has been contended by respondent no.2 that the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Rajput Bhamta a denotified tribe was rejected by order dated 4.12.1980. Along with the said reply, respondent no.2 produced the copy of the alleged order dated 4.12.1980.

(3.) A bare perusal thereof shows that it is nothing but a communication made by the Desk Officer, Directorate of Social Welfare, M.S. Pune to the Secretary to Government, Irrigation Department, Mantralaya, Bombay informing that the petitioner does not belong to notified V. J. Rajput Bhamta and one Ramesh Shankar Pardeshi does not belong to the notified Vimukta Jati Pardeshi Bhamta. This shows that the said communication is not an order as contended by respondent no.2 in the reply, but is merely a communication not in respect of the petitioner alone but one another person belonging to another notified Vimukta Jati. Respondent no.2 could not produce any order as such to show that any enquiry was undertaken in respect of the caste claim of the petitioner after giving him notice. It is thus obvious that the said communication dated 4.12.1980 is not based on any order made after due enquiry.