Rajashri Dilip Thakur v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Remanded
The matter is remanded back
Judgment
Rajashri Dilip Thakur ...Petitioner v/s State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents Mr R.K. Mendadkar with Ms H.K. Mandlik for Petitioner. Mr V.A. Gangal, Special G.P. with Ms M.P. Thakur, AGP, Mr Ashok T. Gade, AGP and Mr V.P. Pandey, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND N.D. DESHPANDE JJ. DATE : 23RD AUGUST 2010. 2 WP3706/07 P.C. :- 1] Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2] By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 12th March 2007 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik. The petitioner claims that she belongs to Thakur, Scheduled Tribe. Admitted position is that as per the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of Kum Madhuri Patil v/s Additional Commissioner and ors., reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241, the report of the Vigilance Cell was called for. That report was in favour of the petitioner. A copy of that report was admittedly supplied to the petitioner. The Scrutiny Committee however without giving any show cause notice to the petitioner asking her to show cause as to why the Scrutiny Committee should not disagree with the opinion of the Vigilance Cell, disregarded the report of the Vigilance Cell. In our opinion, failure of the Scrutiny Committee to issue show 3 WP3706/07 cause notice to the petitioner before disregarding the finding of the Vigilance Cell, asking the petitioner to show cause why the Scrutiny Committee should not disagree with the finding of the Vigilance Cell, is in violation of principles of natural justice. In our opinion, therefore, following order would meet the ends of justice. 3] The order of the Scrutiny Committee in the petition is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee at Nandurbar for enquiry and decision in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by Associate / Private Secretary of this Court. Certified copy expedited. (JUSTICE D.K. DESHMUKH) (JUSTICE N.D. DESHPANDE)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The matter is remanded back
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Aug 2010.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.