1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2043 OF 2010 Smt.Anita Jaywant Patil ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Sachin Dhakephalkar for Petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondents 1 & 2 . Mr.M.S.Lagu for Respondent No.3. Mr.Mogre i/b Mr.Sachindra B.Shetye for Respondent No.4. Ms.Neeta Karnik i/b Mr.Vikas Mali for Respondent No.5. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATED:- APRIL 26, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. Mr.Sonawane, A.G.P. waives notice for Respondents 1 and 2. Mr.Lagu waives notice for Respondent No.3. Mr.Mogre waives notice for Respondent No.4. Ms.Karnik waives notice for Respondent No.5. 2 3. As short question is involved, Petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent. 4. The Petitioner has essentially challenged the order passed by the Respondent No.2 Committee dated 9th February 2010 refusing to validate the Caste Certificate of the Petitioner on diverse grounds. However, for the order that we propose to pass, it may not be necessary to advert to all the factual matrix of the case. 5. Suffice it to observe that pursuant to the remand order passed by this Court on two different occasions in the past, the Scrutiny Committee has once again committed a rudimentary error which has the result of vitiating the decision rendered by it. From the original record which is produced before us by the learned A.G.P., it is noticed that the matter proceeded before the said Committee on different dates namely; 26/5/2009, 28/8/2009, 6/1/2010, 2/2/2010, etc. The Roznama of 26/5/2009 does record that oral arguments of both sides were considered. That Roznama, however, indicates the presence of all the three members of the Committee. The matter then proceeded on 11th August 2009 but was deferred till 28/8/2009. Once again, on 28/8/2009, all the three members were present at the 3 hearing as is noticed from the Roznama at page 77. The matter was, however, deferred to 11th September 2009 and to subsequent dates, which dates may not be relevant for our purpose. 6. We may straight away advert to the Roznama of 6th January 2010 which clearly mentions that oral arguments were heard. The Roznama, however, has been signed only by two members of the Committee, namely, the Chairman and one other member. The matter was ordered to be placed on 8th January 2010 for filing written submissions. However, no Roznama of 8/1/2010 is available in the file. The last Roznama in the file is of 2nd February 2010 which once again refers to the fact that oral arguments were heard on that date. However, this Roznama is again signed by two members of the Committee namely, the Chairman and one other member. The signature of third member is conspicuously absent on the crucial dates namely 6/1/2010 and 2/2/2010, when the hearing took place, on the basis of which the final decision has been rendered by the Committee on 9th February 2010. 7. Going by the original record which has been produced before us, we have no hesitation in taking the view that the final decision rendered by the Committee cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as its decision is based on 4 the hearing that took place only before the Chairman and one other member committee and not all the three members, which was mandatory. 8. In the circumstances, the impugned decision will have to be set-aside and the Petitioner is once again relegated before the Scrutiny Committee for hearing from the stage of oral arguments. 9. We place our dissatisfaction and anguish on record about the manner in which the matter has been handled in the fact situation of the present case even though the question that needs to be addressed is: whether the Petitioner is a genuine and a bonafide member belonging to Lonia, Other Backward Class Caste, who is presently occupying the post of Corporator against the reserved category in the Municipal Corporation of City of Mira-Bhayander in Ward No.79. We direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the Petitioner and pass final decision thereon expeditiously and not later than four weeks from 10th May, 2010. 10. The Petitioner as well as Respondent No.5 through Counsel assure to appear in the Office of the concerned Scrutiny Committee on 10th May, 2010, on which date, the Committee may proceed with the hearing of the 5 case or assign some suitable date, while ensuring that the final decision is taken within the specified time and communicated to the parties within such time. 11. Although the relief claimed in the Petition is disposed of on the above terms, the Petition will have to be listed under caption `direction’ on 16th June 2010 for reporting compliance of the above directions. 12. At this stage, Counsel for the Petitioner submits that due to personal difficulty of the Advocate, he may not be able to appear before the Scrutiny Committee. It is for the Petitioner to make necessary arrangement, as may be advised, but the Scrutiny Committee will be bound to decide the proceedings within four weeks as aforesaid and report compliance in that behalf and shall not entertain request for adjournment on any count at the instance of either private parties. The original record is returned to the learned A.G.P. 13. Having regard to the fact that at least on two earlier occasions, we have relegated the Petitioner for fresh inquiry and this time, another fatal flaw has been committed by the members of the Committee, we have no 6 option but to direct that the inquiry in terms of this order be now proceeded before another set of Scrutiny Committee. We direct the Appropriate Authority to place the matter before the Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee No.3 at Chembur, Mumbai. The papers be transferred to the said Authority forthwith, if necessary, by deputing special messenger. The parties shall appear in the Office of the said Authority on the specified date and time. They have waived notice of said hearing through Counsel. 14. Petition is disposed of on the above terms. It shall, however, be listed on 16th June 2010 for reporting compliance of the above directions. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)