Abhijeet Anil Sarje v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3552 OF 2019 Abhijeet Anil Sarje, Age: 18 years, Occ: Student, r/o at post Mali Galli, Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra Through Tribal Development Department 2.

The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik Division, IInd Floor, Adiwasi Vikas Bhavan, Old Agra Road, Nashik The College of Agriculture, Kini Pati, Osmanabad, Tq. and Dist. Osmanabad Through the Principal ..RESPONDENT Mr Rajendra K. Temkar, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs Vaishali N. Patil - Jadhav, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.

DATE : 13th MARCH, 2019

(2) ORAL ORDER :

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner is a student prosecuting studies in respondent No. 3 - College in B.Sc. Agriculture course. The petitioner was admitted to the College as a candidate belonging to 'Koli Mahadev'. The claim of the petitioner was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee through the College. Copy of the letter issued by the College authorities dated 10th August, 2016 as well as copy of the claim submitted to the Committee are placed on record. The claim is accepted by the Committee for validation on 15th August, 2016.

3.

The submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is, in spite of submitting all necessary documents to the Committee, the Committee is sitting tight over the claim and for non decision by the Committee, the petitioner is apprehending coercive action against the petitioner, thereby the

(3) petitioner could loose his academic career midway. 4.

This being a grievance, learned Counsel for the petitioner prayed for directions to the Committee to decide the claim expeditiously and also prayed for protection for the academic career of the petitioner.

5.

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable forthwith.

Learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Notice of respondent No.3 is dispensed with.

6.

As we find merit in the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petition is disposed of, with directions to respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee to decide the claim as expeditiously as possible and not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of order of this Court. We direct respondent No. 3 not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till decision of the claim by the Committee and we

(4) further make it clear that on decision by the Committee, respondent No. 3 is at liberty to take appropriate steps as provided under law.

7.

With these directions, the petition is disposed of.

( NITIN W. SAMBRE ) (PRASANNA B. VARALE) JUDGE JUDGE Tupe