1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4297 OF 2009 1. Umesh S/o.Madhavrao Adbalwad, Age-Minor, Occu-Education, R/o.Sarsam (Bk.) Tq.Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded, Through father natural guardian, Shri.Madhav Marotirao Adbalwad, Age-44 years, Occu-Service, R/o. As above. 2. Sheshrao S/o.Maroti Adbalwad, Age-29 years, Occu-Education, R/o.Sarsam (Bk.) Tq.Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded 3. Ramkishan S/o.Maroti Adbalwad, Age-25 years, Occu-Education, R/o. Sarsam (Bk.) Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. 2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded, 3. The Collector, Nanded, Dist. Nanded. RESPONDENTS 2 Mr.S.M.Vibhute, learned counsel for petitioners. Mr.N.N.Jadhav, learned AGP for respondents. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 31/07/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. In our order dated 09/07/2009, we had indicated that this petition discloses shocking state of affairs in working of the office of Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist.Nanded in respect of not issuing caste certificates to the petitioners though the appeals filed by them had been allowed. We, therefore, by the aforesaid order had directed the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist.Nanded to personally remain present in this Court on 27/07/2009. Pursuant thereto, the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded was present in the Court and accordingly assurance was given to file the affidavit in reply which has accordingly been done. 3. To re-iterate once again the present petition brings to the fore the shocking state of affairs in respect of working of the office of the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. A citizen has been 3 made to run from pillar to post for no fault of his, for mere issuance of a caste certificate to him on the basis of the appellate order of the Scrutiny Committee. The petitioners have been made to wait for 14 long months from the date of the judgment rendered by the Appellate Court. 4. Such of the facts as are necessary for the decision of this petition are briefly stated thus : a) The petitioners had submitted applications before The Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat for issuance of a caste certificate appending various certificates on which their claim was based. The Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist-Nanded by his order dated 28/02/2008 rejected the aforesaid applications. The petitioners being aggrieved by the said order, filed an appeal before the Scrutiny Committee, which came to be allowed by order dated 21/05/2008. The petitioners thereafter produced a certified copy and a letter issued by the Scrutiny Committee before The Sub Divisional Officer at Kinwat. It appears that the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist.Nanded has been following a very strange practice – a practice not sanctioned by any procedure of Law, but a practice devised by himself. Said practice was to issue a letter to the Scrutiny Committee after the certified copy of the judgment of the Committee was tendered to the Sub Divisional Officer and it was only upon receipt of the said letter from the Scrutiny Committee that a caste certificate would be issued though the appeal filed by the person concerned may have been allowed. The Sub Divisional Officer 4 accordingly on 03/03/2009, addressed a communication to the Scrutiny Committee in respect of the appellate judgment. It is the contention of the Sub Divisional Officer that he had not received any reply. Meanwhile the petitioners who were anxious for getting the requisite caste certificate submitted various applications on 05/06/2008, 20/06/2008, 04/07/2008, 07/07/2008 and on other dates. The petitioners who are desperate in getting the caste certificate, submitted an application to The District Collector on “Lokshahi Din”. The Collector accordingly addressed certain communication to The Sub Divisional Officer and The Sub Divisional Officer replied to the said communication by stating that it was a quasi-judicial matter and accordingly the report would be submitted. The petitioners therefore are constrained to file this petition in this Court. 4. As pointed out, notice of this petition came to be issued to the respondents and the respondent Sub Divisional Officer, who was then holding the charge as a Sub Divisional Officer at Kinwat, Dist. Nanded and presently he is Sub Divisional Officer, at Jalna, has filed his affidavit in reply. In the affidavit in reply filed by The Sub Divisional Officer, it is admitted that the petitioners had brought a certified copy and a letter tendered by the Appellate Authority, Aurangabad. It is also stated in the affidavit in reply that after receipt of the above letter and the said copy, the Sub Divisional Officer in order to ascertain the genuineness of the said certified copy, addressed a communication to the Appellate Authority. In the 5 affidavit in reply, it is nowhere stated that no reply from the Scrutiny Committee was received by The Sub Divisional Officer. 5. The affidavit in reply does not disclose as to what factors prompted the Sub Divisional Officer to ascertain the genuineness of the certified copy brought by the petitioners. It is not stated in the affidavit in reply that how the suspicion of the Sub Divisional Officer was arose. What had been tendered before the Sub Divisional Officer was a certified copy of the judgment of the Appellate Authority. It is indeed unfortunate that the letter and the copy had been though tendered by the petitioners in December 2008, the caste certificate till this date has not been issued to the petitioners by the Sub Divisional Officer. The errant Sub Divisional officer, who had made the petitioners to run from pillar to post, now stands transferred at Jalna. The incumbent to the said office i.e. the successor of the errant Sub Divisional Officer has also till this date not issued any certificate. We are however informed by the learned AGP that the certificate would be issued to the petitioners tomorrow. It is extremely disquieting to note that the Sub Divisional Officer though had been appraised about the decision of the Appellate Authority and had been received with a copy of the decision of the Appellate Authority as well as the letter which had been signed by the Scrutiny Committee, chose to sit back and await an answer from the Scrutiny Committee in respect of the genuineness of the certified copy. We have no words to deprecate this attitude, conduct of the Sub Divisional Officer in refusing to issue the caste certificate despite 6 tendering of the certified copy of the order of the Appellate Authority. It is quite understandable that in a given case, a trickster litigant may resort to forge a copy of the judicial order yet, but that would not justify the action of the Sub Divisional Officer in waiting for an eternity and to ascertain the decision of the Appellate Authority of which copy was tendered before him. If a litigant applies for a certificate on the basis of forged copy, appropriate measures are available in Law for dealing with such eventuality. 6. According to us, the entire conduct of the Sub Divisional Officer shocks our judicial conscious and the plight of the present petitioners can well be imagined. They have all been put to un- necessary travail and expenses for no fault of theirs. Though apology is tendered by the Sub Divisional Officer in his affidavit in reply, we refuse to accept the said apology. According to us, the interest of justice would be sufficed by directing the Collector to hold and conduct an inquiry in respect of the delay in issuance of the caste certificate to the petitioners and to take appropriate action specified in Law, if warranted, against the guilty officer. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds. We direct the Sub Divisional Officer to forthwith issue caste certificate to the petitioners with an intimation to this Court about the date on which the certificates have been received by the petitioners. We also direct the Collector to conduct an inquiry in respect of the enormous delay which has reasoned in the issuance of the caste certificate to the 7 petitioners and then to take such action specified in Law as is warranted on the basis of the facts which may be disclosed. We further saddle costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) on the Sub Divisional Officer namely Sanjay Sitaram Gaikwad, the Sub Divisional Officer, working at Jalna. 8. Rule thus made absolute on the above terms. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JULY 2009/wp4297-09 8