JAYDEO S O MAHADEO PARATE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed Civil Application No. 6661 of 2005 for taking his undertaking on record to the effect that he does not wish to claim any benefit of belonging to Scheduled Tribe in future and for a direction that, since he was appointed on 18-6-1997, his appointment be protected and he be reinstated in service. However, taking into consideration the controversy involved in the present petition, we have taken up the present petition for final hearing.

(2.) That the petitioner claimed to be belonging to the tribe "halba", which is notified as a Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner came to be appointed as a Junior clerk on temporary basis vide order dated June 18, 1997 by the respondent no. 3. Appointment of the petitioner was against a post reserved for the scheduled Tribe candidate. Vide another order dated September 5, 2001, the respondent No. 3 held that the petitioner was entitled to be confirmed in service as a Junior clerk.

(3.) Since appointment of the petitioner was against a post reserved for scheduled Tribe, the claim of the petitioner, which was based on the basis of the caste Certificate issued to the petitioner by the Executive Magistrate, Arjuni morgaon, dated 22-8-1988, came to be referred by his employer to the respondent No. 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter referred to as "the Committee"). The respondent No. 2-Committee came to the conclusion that the petitioner did not belong to the Tribe 'halba', but he belongs to caste "koshti" and as such, it invalidated the claim of the petitioner vide order dated September 23, 2002. The petitioner, thereafter approached this Court challenging the order passed by respondent No. 2-Committee. It appears that during pendency of the petition, the petitioner's services came to be terminated vide order dated December 12, 2002. The petitioner, therefore, amended the petition so as to challenge his termination.