Vidyadhar Sudamrao Paikrao v. The State Of Mah And ORS

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.108 OF 2013 Vidyadhar Sudamrao Paikrao, Age : 36 years, Occu. Legal Practitioner and Social Worker, R/o Bhanudasnagar, Aurangabad, Tal. & Dist. Aurangabad PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, through its Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2.

The Secretary, Social Justice and Cultural Activities and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai RESPONDENTS .....

Mr. Krishna Rodge, Advocate holding for Mr. Pratap G. Rodge, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. P.S. Patil, A.G.P. for the respondent .....

CORAM: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ & R.G. AVACHAT, J.

DATE: 23.09.2019

- 2 - PER COURT :

1] Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2] The issue raised in the instant petition filed in public interest concerns Govt. Resolution dated 15th June, 1995 and the Circular dated 18th May, 2013, relaxing the requirement of submitting caste validity certificates for members of the Scheduled Tribes, appointed prior to 15th June, 1995, modified by the Circular dated 18th May, 2013 by shifting the date.

3] However, the issue need not be decided by us in light of the three Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court reported as 2017 (8) SCC 670 Chairman and Managing Director, FCI & Ors. v. Jagdish Balaram Bahira & Ors. The said decision holds that caste validity certificates have to be scrutinized by the Scrutiny Committee and if invalidated by it, the beneficiary has to forfeit all benefits obtained on the strength of the certificate which has been invalidated. 4] Thus, the law being set at rest by the Supreme Court, we simply observe that the respondents would abide by the dictum of the law

- 3 - laid down in the afore-noted decision and would comply with the same. 5] The Public Interest Litigation is dismissed.

6] No costs.

(R.G. AVACHAT, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE npj/PIL108-2013.doc