Sunita Vithalsing Bayas v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:19921-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9499 OF 2016 Sunita Vithalsing Bayas ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra and Others ..RESPONDENTS ....

Mr. B.L. Sagar Killarikar, Advocate for petitioner Mr. A.R. Kale, Addl.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2 Mr. S.V. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent no.3 ....

CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ DATE : 24th JULY, 2025 PER COURT :

.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was appointed on open Seat, on the post of Supervisor under the Instigated Child Development Scheme as against the post reserved for Project Affected Persons (PAP) category, her caste certificate of Rajput Bhamta (Vimukta Jati) was referred to Respondent No.2 - scrutiny committee, who invalidated the said claim by the impugned order dated 06th August, 2016. He submits that the petitioner has secured some material which would help her to support her caste claim. He, therefore, submits that the matter be remanded to Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee. 1 / 3

2.

Learned Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 fairly submits that if the petitioner is ready to file on record some material in support of her caste certificate, the matter may be remanded to Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee.

3.

We have heard both the sides and also perused the papers on record. The affidavit-in-reply filed by Respondent No.3 - Zilla Parishad shows that there is no dispute that the petitioner is appointed as against the post reserved for Project Affected Persons category, however invalidation of her claim towards Rajput Bhamta will come in her way at the time of seeking benefits like promotion in the employment. Be that as it may. 4.

Since the petitioner claims that she has secured some documents which would support her caste claim, we pass the following order :-

ORDER

(I) Writ Petition is partly allowed.

(II) Impugned order dated 10th March, 2025 passed by Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration and decision. (III) The petitioner shall appear before the Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee on 21st August, 2025.

2 / 3

(IV) Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee shall decide the matter within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.

( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. ) ( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) SSD 3 / 3