Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajkumar s/o Fulchand Jaiswal, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 27.08.2009 passed by the Divisional Caste Verification Committee, Amravati, which rejected his caste claim of being 'Kalal', an Other Backward Class (OBC) recognized at serial 254 vide Government Resolution dated 09.08.1995. The petitioner had obtained a caste certificate and was appointed as a driver with respondent 3 (Veterinary and Animal Science College, Udgir) on 16.06.2008. The respondent 3 forwarded his caste claim to the Verification Committee for verification. The Committee sought a report from the Vigilance Officer, who recorded statements of the petitioner, his father, and other relatives, and submitted a report stating that the forefathers of the petitioner were residents of Maharashtra State since 1960/1965 and their caste was 'Kalal'. Despite this, the Verification Committee rejected the claim on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce any documentary proof of 'permanent resident' prior to 1967. The petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition 3850/2009, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition after annexing documentary evidence. The Court observed that the Verification Committee had not considered the Vigilance Officer's report and other evidence on record. The Court held that the impugned order was unsustainable and quashed it, directing the Committee to reconsider the petitioner's caste claim afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and to decide the same within three months from the date of the order.
Headnote
A) Caste Verification - Other Backward Class - 'Kalal' Caste - Government Resolution dated 09.08.1995 - The petitioner claimed 'Kalal' OBC status based on a certificate issued under Government Resolution dated 09.08.1995. The Verification Committee rejected the claim for lack of documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967. The Court held that the Committee erred in ignoring the Vigilance Officer's report which confirmed the caste and residence of the petitioner's forefathers since 1960/1965. The impugned order was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Divisional Caste Verification Committee was justified in rejecting the petitioner's caste claim of 'Kalal' (OBC) solely on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967, despite the Vigilance Officer's report supporting the claim.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 27.08.2009 passed by respondent 1 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to respondent 1 for fresh consideration of the petitioner's caste claim, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and to decide the same within three months from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Caste verification
- Other Backward Class
- Permanent residence requirement
- Documentary proof
- Vigilance report
- Government Resolution dated 09.08.1995
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (01) 341
Writ Petition (WP) 4837/2010
ROHIT B. DEO, Y.G. KHOBRAGADE
Mr. P.R. Puri (for petitioner), Mrs. Kalyani R. Deshpande (AGP for respondents 1 and 4), Mr. L.S. Borkar h/f. Mr. A.Z. Jibhkate (for respondents 2 and 3)
Rajkumar s/o Fulchand Jaiswal
The Divisional Caste Verification Committee, Amravati; The Maharashtra Animal and Fishery Science University, Nagpur; The Veterinary and Animal Science College, Udgir; The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Divisional Caste Verification Committee rejecting the petitioner's caste claim of 'Kalal' (OBC).
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the order dated 27.08.2009 passed by respondent 1 and direction to reconsider the caste claim.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's caste claim of 'Kalal' (OBC) was rejected by the Verification Committee on the ground that he failed to produce documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967, despite the Vigilance Officer's report supporting the claim.
Previous Decisions
The petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition 3850/2009, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition after annexing documentary evidence.
Issues
Whether the Divisional Caste Verification Committee was justified in rejecting the petitioner's caste claim solely on the ground of lack of documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967, ignoring the Vigilance Officer's report and other evidence.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner's counsel submitted that the forefathers of the petitioner were residents of Maharashtra State prior to 1967 and the Vigilance Officer's report confirmed the caste and residence. The Committee erred in rejecting the claim without considering the report.
The respondents argued that the petitioner failed to produce documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967, which was essential for verification of the caste claim.
Ratio Decidendi
The Verification Committee cannot reject a caste claim solely on the ground of absence of documentary proof of permanent residence prior to 1967, when the Vigilance Officer's report and other evidence on record support the claim. The Committee must consider all evidence and give a reasoned order.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 27.08.2009 passed by respondent 1 – Divisional Caste Verification Committee, whereby caste claim of the petitioner being ‘Kalal’, Other Backward Class (OBC) has been rejected.
Vigilance Officer after recording the statements of petitioner, his father and other relatives submitted his report recording that the forefathers of the petitioner are residents of Maharashtra State since 1960/1965 and their caste is “Kalal”.
However, respondent 1 – Verification Committee rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce any documentary proof of “permanent resident” prior to 1967.
Procedural History
The petitioner obtained a caste certificate of 'Kalal' (OBC) and was appointed as a driver on 16.06.2008. The respondent 3 forwarded the caste claim to the Verification Committee. The Committee sought a Vigilance report, which supported the claim. However, the Committee rejected the claim on 27.08.2009. The petitioner filed Writ Petition 3850/2009, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition. The present Writ Petition 4837/2010 was filed challenging the order.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
