Chaitanya Shrenik Durugkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

1 wp 9366.2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 959 WRIT PETITION NO.9366 OF 2021 Chaitanya s/o Shrenik Durugkar, Age: 23 years, Occu.: Student, R/o. "Bharat Manti", Third Floor, Near Sanskar School, Beed, Tq. and Dist. : Beed .. Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Social Justice Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

The District Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Beed, Through its member Secretary, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Samajik Nyay Bhavan, Nagar Road, Beed .. Respondents ...

Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Chandrakant R. Thorat AGP for Respondents: Mr. S. W. Mundhe ...

CORAM:S. V. GANGAPURWALA & R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATE: 25th AUGUST, 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.):

1.

Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties, matter is taken up for final hearing.

2 wp 9366.2021 2.

The caste claim of the petitioner was referred to respondent no. 2 committee for verification. The caste claim is invalidated, aggrieved thereby the present petition.

3.

Mr. Thorat, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not submit the old school extract of his grandfather which records the caste as 'Saitwal'. According to the learned Advocate, no proper opportunity was given. One more opportunity be given to the petitioner.

4.

The learned A.G.P. submits that ample opportunity was given to the petitioner. Time to time matter was adjourned at the request of the petitioner and his father. Subsequently say was also filed by the petitioner and he was also heard and thereafter the matter was decided.

5.

Perusal of the Judgment, it is manifest that ample opportunity is given to the petitioner and his father. Time to time adjournment was sought by

3 wp 9366.2021 the petitioner. The petitioner certainly cannot make a grievance that proper opportunity was not given to him.

6.

It is further submitted that the petitioner could not produce the old school extract of his grandfather.

7.

The matter pertains to the social status of the petitioner.

8.

Considering the above, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner. However, the petitioner also deserves to be mulct with costs.

9.

The impugned order is quashed and set aside on condition that the petitioner deposits costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) within a period of two (02) weeks from today. The parties are relegated before the Scrutiny committee. The petitioner shall appear before the committee on 01.09.2021 and on the said date produce all the documents on which the petitioner seeks to rely.

4 wp 9366.2021 In case, additional documents are produced, the committee may conduct the vigilance in respect of the said documents and thereafter decide the proceeding afresh. The committee may endeavour to decide the said proceeding by 10.10.2021. The deposit of costs is condition precedent. The costs may be deposited with the Advocates Bar Association, High Court.

10. Rule accordingly made absolute on above terms.

11. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. [R. N. LADDHA, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] marathe