Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Anjali Vithalrao Jukte, a 25-year-old candidate belonging to the 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe, applied for the post of Assistant Chemical Analyzer, Group B (Gazetted) under the reserved category. She possessed a tribe certificate and her proposal for a validity certificate was pending before the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Maharashtra, the Directorate of Forensic Science, the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, and the Scrutiny Committee to issue a provisional appointment order without insisting on the tribe validity certificate. The petitioner relied on the judgment in Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra and others, where the Bombay High Court held that a person from a reserved category cannot be denied an appointment order merely because their claim is pending. The Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the petition and directed the respondents to issue a provisional appointment order within two weeks, subject to the final outcome of the validity proceedings. The Court also granted liberty to the respondents to cancel the appointment if the validity certificate is ultimately denied. The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench of Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge and R.M. Joshi on 21st March 2024.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Scheduled Tribe Appointment - Provisional Appointment Pending Validity Certificate - The petitioner, a candidate belonging to 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe, sought a writ of mandamus directing the State to issue a provisional appointment order as Assistant Chemical Analyzer without insisting on a tribe validity certificate, as her proposal for validity was pending. The Court, relying on Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.2136/2011), held that a reserved category candidate cannot be denied appointment merely because the validity claim is pending. The Court directed the respondents to issue a provisional appointment order within two weeks, subject to the outcome of the validity proceedings. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe category can be denied appointment to a reserved post solely on the ground that her tribe validity certificate is pending before the Scrutiny Committee.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to issue a provisional order of appointment to the petitioner as Assistant Chemical Analyzer, Group B (Gazetted) within two weeks from today, subject to the final outcome of the validity proceedings. If the validity certificate is ultimately denied, the respondents are at liberty to cancel the appointment. Rule is made absolute in those terms.
Law Points
- Provisional appointment pending tribe validity certificate
- Reserved category candidate cannot be denied appointment due to pending verification
- Mandamus for appointment without insisting on validity certificate
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (03) 16
Writ Petition No.3152 of 2024
Ravindra V. Ghuge, R.M. Joshi
Shri Mahesh Deshmukh i/by Shri Umesh B. Gite for Petitioner, Shri S.K. Tambe AGP for Respondent Nos.1,2 and 4/State, Shri S.J. Salgare for Respondent No.3/MPSC
State of Maharashtra, Directorate of Forensic Science, Maharashtra Public Service Commission, Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking mandamus for provisional appointment pending tribe validity certificate.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.1 (Home Department) to issue a provisional order of appointment as Assistant Chemical Analyzer, Group B (Gazetted) in her favor from Scheduled Tribe category without insisting for Tribe Validity Certificate.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's tribe validity certificate proposal was pending, and she was being denied appointment on that ground.
Previous Decisions
The petitioner relied on the judgment in Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.2136/2011) where the court held that a reserved category candidate cannot be denied appointment merely because the validity claim is pending.
Issues
Whether a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe category can be denied appointment to a reserved post solely on the ground that her tribe validity certificate is pending before the Scrutiny Committee.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that she belongs to 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe, has a tribe certificate, and her proposal for validity is pending. She relied on Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra to argue that appointment cannot be denied pending validity.
Respondents did not oppose the petition; the AGP and MPSC advocate appeared and the matter was heard finally.
Ratio Decidendi
A candidate from a reserved category cannot be denied an appointment order merely because his/her tribe validity claim is pending before the Scrutiny Committee. The appointment can be made provisional, subject to the final outcome of the validity proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner belongs to the 'Mannervarlu', Scheduled Tribe category. She has a Tribe Certificate. Her proposal for seeking a validity certificate is pending.
We deem it apposite to reproduce paragraph Nos.15 to 18 of the judgment in Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane (supra) hereunder:-
No doubt, that the purpose of the said condition is with a noble aim of ensuring that the reserved seat should be occupied by a candidate belonging to that particular reserved category and no candidate or person, not belonging to reserved category, should usurp the said post. However, at the same time, the ...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.3152 of 2024 before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. On 21st March 2024, the Court granted leave to add the Competent Validity Committee as Respondent No.4, and with consent of parties, the rule was made returnable forthwith and the petition was heard finally.
Acts & Sections
