1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.694 OF 2010 (Suneel Marotrao Shete vs. State and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND F.M. REIS, JJ. DATED : MARCH 22, 2010 Heard Shri Adbe, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Jichkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. The petition is directed against the order dated 15.7.2008 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal whereby original application of the petitioner came to be dismissed. Shri Adbe, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner was never appointed on the post of Peon from the reserved category. On the other hand, the petitioner was sponsored by the Employment Exchange from the 2 open category and though the appointment order issued on 24.1.1984 shows that the appointment of the petitioner was made from Scheduled Caste category, however, in fact, it was from the open category. It is contended that after the said appointment order was issued, the petitioner made a representation to the competent Authority in this regard. However, the competent Authority had not taken any cognizance of the said representation. It is further contended that the petitioner had no option, but to submit the caste certificate dated 12.8.1981 showing that he belongs to Scheduled Caste since it was demanded by the Authorities of the Public Works Department though in fact, it was not necessary for the petitioner to submit the caste certificate since appointment of the petitioner was not from the reserved category. It is submitted that the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal failed to consider all these relevant facts and came to the conclusion that since the Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner, the respondents were right in terminating the service of the petitioner. It is contended that the findings 3 recorded by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal are unsustainable in law. Shri Jichkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader has supported the impugned order and contended that the appointment order clearly shows that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste category. The petitioner also submitted caste certificate in the year 1987. The caste certificate was referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification, the petitioner participated in the verification proceedings and the Caste Scrutiny Committee after due verification, invalidated the caste certificate. It is in such situation, the Authorities of the Public Works Department terminated the service of the petitioner. We have considered the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. In the backdrop of the above referred undisputed facts, it is very difficult to appreciate the contentions canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to hereinabove particularly in view of the following facts : (1) the order of appointment of the petitioner dated 4 12.1.1984 shows that he was appointed from the Scheduled Caste category, (2) the petitioner submitted the caste certificate dated 12/8/1981 to the Authorities, (3) the caste certificate was referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification, (4) the petitioner participated in the verification proceedings and after due verification, the Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner. In the circumstances, the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal is just and proper and needs no interference. The petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE khj