1 wp6486-11.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6486 OF 2011 Vasudeo Shrikisan Chavan .. Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr.M.S.Karnik for the petitioner. Mr.R.M.Patne, A.G.P for respondent No.1. Mr.S.A.Sawant with Mr.Ketan V. Joshi for respondent No.2. Mr.Sunil Gangan i/by RMG Law Associates for respondent No.6. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 12th August 2011. P.C.: . This petition is also identical to Writ Petition No.4562 of 2011 and the only distinction noted is with regard to the name of the village. Here also the petitioner applied in terms of the advertisement that was published on 31st March 2010, under the same scheme of respondent No.6-Corporation. The petitioner stated that in pursuance of this advertisement, the application was made and he was held to be qualified. He was selected in the lucky draw. However, an application was made by the unsuccessful applicants, respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 22nd November 2010 stating 2 wp6486-11.doc that the petitioner-applicant has filed a false affidavit before the Tahsildar that he is resident of village Nhavare and, therefore, action should be initiated to cancel the certificate and take criminal proceedings. Criminal proceedings have indeed been initiated. It was stated that the Tahsildar had issued the certificate in the form that is prescribed, but, looking to the nature of the complaint, this Court by an order delivered in Writ Petition No.3064 of 2011 directed that an inquiry be initiated. Accordingly, the inquiry was initiated. The Collector has held that the petitioner is not resident of village Nhavare. 2 Mr.Karnik appearing on behalf of the petitioner raised some what identical contentions as in Writ Petition No.4562 of 2011. He pointed out that this is not a case where the petitioner could be said to be misleading the authorities. The petitioner was not a stranger to this village. The petitioner has pointed out that he was born in the said village. He has taken his primary and secondary education in the village Nhavare. He also has his relatives and it is not as if he is not residing in the village at all. The allegation that the certificate is obtained by giving false information, is totally incorrect. 3 wp6486-11.doc 3 Mr.Karnik submits that the documents that are produced, include correspondence which has been received at the address of village Nhavare, of the petitioner. It has been pointed that the certificate has been issued by Tahsildar on the basis that the petitioner has established his connection with the village. My attention is invited by Mr.Karnik to the affidavit that has been filed by the petitioner and to the school leaving certificate issued by the Zilla Parishad Primary School, village Nhavare, Taluka Shirur, District Pune. My attention is also invited to a certificate that has been issued by the Head Master of Mallikarjun Vidyalaya where the petitioner had studied upto 10th standard. My attention is also invited to the bonafide certificate issued by the said school dated 11th August 1987. My attention is also invited to the documents including correspondence, income certificate which is stated to have been received by the petitioner at village Nhavare. There is also a proof of telephone connection being provided at a house which is in village Nhavare. The extract of the bank account which has a branch at village Nhavare has also been produced. In the submission of Mr.Karnik, therefore, this is a fit case where the 4 wp6486-11.doc complaint made by some disgruntled persons has been taken cognisance of, as if the petitioner is a criminal and he has been prosecuted accordingly. Nobody has committed any error or mistake nor any deliberate act can be attributed, much less malafide, in issuing the certificate. 4 On the other hand, the respondents supported the impugned order. The learned A.G.P and learned advocate appearing for the original complainant contended that the Collector found, as a matter of fact, that for the past so many years the petitioner had never resided in village Nhavare. He had shifted to Saradwadi. He and his wife, both, are members of Saradwadi, Gram Panchayat. They have contested the elections on the basis that they are residing in village Saradwadi. The voters list for the electoral constituency in which village Saradwadi falls, also contains the name of the petitioner. The petitioner’s wife has purchased a car and for registration of the vehicle, the address provided is of village Saradwadi. Thus, it is only with an intent to get an authorisation for LPG distribution, that the petitioner has misled and misguided the authorities and obtained the residence certificate. For all these 5 wp6486-11.doc reasons and when criminal actions are initiated, this Court should not protect the petitioner. 5 With the assistance of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have perused the petition and all annexures thereto. The Collector has all throughout recorded that it may be true that the petitioner has produced certain documents showing his birth or his primary education or his residence for sometime in village Nhavare, but, the fact remains that in the recent past the petitioner has established himself in village Saradwadi. The petitioner and his wife are registered as voters for the electoral unit/constituency which village Saradwadi has been forming part of and their names are in the said voters list. He and his wife, both, are members of Gram Panchayat, Saradwadi. They have always given their residential address as that of village Saradwadi. The documents produced in relation to the acquisition of movable and immovable property would show that the place of residence is village Saradwadi. Even before the Circle Officer, Shirur, their statement is that they are residing in village Saradwadi. Therefore, the Collector has found that against such overwhelming evidence showing their residence 6 wp6486-11.doc in village Saradwadi, what they have produced is some document showing the petitioner to be residing at village Nhavare, but, that is of distant past. It is the proximity with the date of advertisement and the recent past, which is relevant. Applying this yardstick, what he has found is that he has not been able to substantiate his case of having residence on permanent basis in village Nhavare. 6 In this behalf, perusal of the certificate issued by the Tahsildar, a copy of which is at Annexure (see page 55), shows that it has been issued in Form SEC. This certificate is issued with intent of giving preference to local people in employment schemes generated or initiated by the State. It is on that basis that the certificate has been issued. The petitioner has satisfied the Tahsildar that he is residing in village Nhavare. However, this certificate based as it is and knowing the intent for obtaining it, should demonstrate the factum of permanent and continuing residence in particular region or a village in this case. It is that test which has to be applied and which is applied by the Collector. In the given facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the Collector has committed any error of law apparent on the face of 7 wp6486-11.doc record or perversity in concluding that the petitioner is not the resident of village Nhavare, but village Saradwadi. That is how the conclusion in impugned order dated 27th July 2011 reads. Read in the backdrop of the materials produced, I am of the opinion that the conclusion drawn dismissing the appeal and cancelling the residence certificate, requires no interference in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed but without any orders as to costs. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)