1. No category

1 WP336­15.odt
rt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
C
ou
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.336/2015
Subhash s/o Shankarrao Dharmik,
Aged about 44 years,
Occupation: Service,
R/o Mankapur, Nayvihar, Nagpur.
..
PETITIONER
ig
h
.. Versus ..
H
The Joint Secretary,
Law and Judiciary Department,
Administrative Building,
Civil Lines, Nagpur.
..
RESPONDENT
ba
y
Mr. Abhay Sambre, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mrs. B.H. Dangre, Government Pleader for Respondent.
...
CORAM : B.R. Gavai & Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, JJ.
DATED : January 30, 2015.
om
ORAL JUDGMENT (per B.R. Gavai, J. )
1.
Initially when the matter was called out, the learned
B
Government Pleader has sought time. On the last date itself, we
had clarified that since the matter in issue is covered by the
judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Arun V.
Sonone vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2015
(1) Mh.L.J. 457, we would not be granting any further time. In that
view of the matter, the prayer by the learned Government Pleader
for grant of time is rejected.
::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2015 16:55:33 :::
2 WP336­15.odt
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.
3.
The petitioner who claims to be belonging to Scheduled
rt
2.
C
ou
Tribe Halba came to be appointed as Clerk-cum-Typist in the office
of the Government Pleader, High Court, Nagpur on 8.7.1996. Since
the petitioner’s appointment was against the post reserved for
Scheduled Tribe, the same came to be referred to the Scrutiny
Committee. The claim of the petitioner is rejected.
In the meantime the petitioner was directed to produce
ig
h
4.
the certificate of belonging to Special Backward Class category.
The petitioner has accordingly submitted the validity certificate
5.
H
certifying that the petitioner belongs to Special Backward Class.
Heard Mr. Sambre, learned counsel appearing on behalf
ba
y
of the petitioner and Mrs. Dangre, learned Government Pleader for
the respondent.
6.
Mr. A.R. Sambre, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
om
of the petitioner submits that in view of the judgment of the Full
Bench of this Court in the case of Arun V. Sonone (supra), the
petitioner’s appointment as well as promotion are entitled to be
B
protected.
7.
Mrs. B.H. Dangre, learned Government Pleader appearing
on behalf of the respondent vehemently opposes the claim of the
petitioner.
She submits that though the petitioner’s initial
appointment is prior to 28.11.2000, the promotion granted to the
petitioner is subsequent to that year.
8.
The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Arun V.
::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2015 16:55:33 :::
3 WP336­15.odt
Sonone (supra) has held that all appointments of the persons, who
rt
claimed to be belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe and who have
28.11.2000 are entitled to be protected.
9.
C
ou
been found to be belonging to Halba Koshti, made prior to
In that view of the matter, we find that the petition
deserves to be allowed and same is allowed.
The respondent is
directed to protect the services of the petitioner. It is further made
ig
h
clear that the petitioner would not be entitled to any of the benefits
on the basis of his claim of belonging to Scheduled Tribe. However,
it is made clear that since the petitioner has already produced the
H
validity certificate certifying that he belongs to Special Backward
Class category, the seniority of the petitioner shall be reckoned
ba
y
after considering him as a candidate belonging to Special Backward
Class.
Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
11.
Civil Application No.211 of 2015 is preferred by the
om
10.
petitioner seeking to amend the petition so as to challenge the
order of termination dated 19.01.2015 which was issued during the
B
pendency of the petition. Since in the substantive petition, we have
held that the petitioner is entitled to protection of his services, no
orders are necessary on the civil application. Same is disposed of.
(Mrs. Mridula Bhatkar, J. )
(B.R. Gavai, J.)
...
halwai/p.s.
::: Downloaded on - 31/03/2015 16:55:33 :::