Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Abhimanyu Dattu Thakar, was issued a caste certificate on 22 June 1981 and appointed as a peon in the office of respondent No.3, Executive Engineer, Maharashtra Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd, District Sindhudurg, on a reserved post for Scheduled Tribe category. His caste certificate was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee (respondent No.2) for verification. The petitioner produced several documents, and the Vigilance Cell examined them, confirming their genuineness. The Vigilance Cell Report also recorded a caste entry of the petitioner's cousin grandfather, Ganu Kusha Thakar, and a statement from the petitioner's cousin uncle regarding traits and customs of the Thakar tribe. The petitioner was given a copy of the report and an opportunity to respond. He filed his response and was heard on 12 February 2013. Despite this, the Committee invalidated the claim on 23 May 2013, ignoring the petitioner's submissions. The petitioner then filed Writ Petition No.8756 of 2013 before the Bombay High Court. On 28 February 2014, a Division Bench set aside the Committee's order and remitted the matter back with a direction to reconsider the decision in light of the Division Bench judgment in Madhuri Nitin Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra, 2014(4) BCR 752. The present writ petition challenges the Committee's original order, which the court found to be in utter ignorance of settled law and in defiance of directions from the Apex Court and this Court. The court allowed the petition, setting aside the Committee's order and directing reconsideration.
Headnote
A) Scheduled Tribes - Tribe Claim Verification - Thakar Scheduled Tribe - Scheduled Tribe Order, 1950 - Scrutiny Committee invalidated petitioner's tribe claim despite vigilance report confirming documents and Division Bench directions in Madhuri Nitin Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra - Court held that the Committee acted in ignorance of settled law and remitted the matter for reconsideration (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Scrutiny Committee's invalidation of the petitioner's tribe claim as Thakar Scheduled Tribe was in accordance with settled legal principles and binding directions of the High Court.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Scrutiny Committee's order dated 23 May 2013 and directing reconsideration in light of the Division Bench judgment in Madhuri Nitin Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra.
Law Points
- Tribe claim verification
- Scrutiny Committee must follow settled law
- Division Bench directions binding
- Thakar Scheduled Tribe
- Scheduled Tribe Order 1950
