Sanjay S/O Gangaiyya Gattu v. Joint Commissioner And Vice Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee And ORS

1 wp6208.18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 6208 OF 2018 ( Sanjay s/o Gangaiyya Gattu ..vs.. Joint Commissioner & Vice-Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur and others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.R. Narnaware, Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Alap Palshikar, AGP for respondent No.1, Mrs. S.S. Jachak, Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE : 10-02-2025 Heard.

2.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter is covered by the judgment of this Court in Hemant s/o Govindrao Langhe vs. Deputy Director, Health Services, Nagpur Circle in Writ Petition No.2904/2022, decided on 25-08-2023. It is, therefore, contended that the petitioner be granted retiral benefits.

3.

The learned Counsel for the respondents does not dispute the proposition as laid down in Hemant s/o Govindrao Langhe vs. Deputy Director (supra). What is necessary to note is that the petitioner was appointed as a Meter Reader with respondent No.2 on 04-11-1996 in a seat reserved for the "Halbi" Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner superannuated on 30-09-2022. However, the tribe claim of the petitioner came to be invalidated only on 04-09-2018. The said order is challenged in this petition. By order dated 03.10.2018 statusquo was granted, and the same has been in force since then.

2 wp6208.18.odt 4.

In Hemant s/o Govindrao Langhe vs. Deputy Director (supra), while considering a similar issue after considering the law on the point, it has been held that since there was no statutory adjudication while the petitioner was in service, his retiral benefits could not be withheld. Applying the same dictum, we hold that the petitioner would be entitled to his retiral benefits, as there is no statutory adjudication regarding the validity of his tribe claim during the tenure of his service. 5.

The petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. The benefits be paid to the petitioner as early as possible to the extent permitted under the service rules governing the petitioner and, in any case, within a period of eight weeks from today.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) adgokar