SHANTIDEVI KAMALESHKUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

                                        (2008) 12 S.C.R. 805

           --+
                           SHANTIDEVI KAIVlALESHKUMAR YADAV                             A
                                                     v.
                            STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
                               (Civil Appeal No. 5243 of 2008)
                                        AUGUST 26, 2008
                                                                                        B
                  [DALVEER BHANDARI AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.]

                       Administrative Law:
                         Principles of natural justice - Case before Caste Scrutiny
                  Committee - Conclusion of hearing for orders - Thereafter, Caste      c
                  Certificate Registercalled, for inspection andrepresentative from
                  office of Tehsildar, for recording statement, without notice to
                  appellants - Held: It amounts to violation of principles of natural
                  justice, equity and good conscience ...., Matter remitted to. Caste
                  Scrutiny Committee for deciding the case afresh.                      0
            '          After closure of the hearing of the case for orders
            Jr-   before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the Caste Certificate
                  Register and the representative from the Office of
                  Tehsildar were called without notice to the appellant.
                  Aggrieved appellant filed writ petition which was                     E
                  dismissed. Hence the present appeal.
                      Disposing of the appeal and remitting the matter to
                  Caste Scrutiny Committee, the Court
                                                                    ~'"'




                       HELD: In the impugned judgment, there is no F
                  discussion regarding the main grievance of the appellant
                  why the Caste Certificate Register was called for
                  inspection on 28.10.2003 and the statement of the
                  representative from the Office of the Tehsildar, Bombay
                  City was recorded on 7.11.2003 after the conclusion of G
          -+-.
'--.,,/     __.   the hearing. Respondent could not give any satisfactory
                  reply why the caste register was called for inspection
                  and the statements· of the representatives of the Office of
                  the Tehsildar were recorded after the conclusion of the
                                                 '605                                   H
                                               ·-· -···· ···-· ..
         806       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2008] 12 S.C.R.
                    1

     A   hearing withoqt any notice td the appellant. In
(,
         consonance with the principles of natural justice, equity,
         good conscience and fairness, the impugned judgments
         of the High Court and the Caste Scrutiny Committee are
         sef aside-. iParas 6 to 8] [807-8-E]
     B        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5243
         of 2008
              From the final Judgment ar;td Order dated 14.10.2005 of
         the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Civil Writ Petition
     c   No. 9231of 2003
              Harish N. Salve, Sushil Karanjkar and K.N. Rai. for the
         Appellant.
        . · · Aparajita Singh, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Sanjay Kharde, Asha
       G. Nair, Makarand D. Adkar, Vijay Kumar, Vikram, Vishwajit
     D Singh! C.K. Sasi, Anoop Kumar Srivastava, Rameshwar Prasad                1

       Goyal,..P.R. Ramasesh, R~hul Gupta, Reema Sharma, Siddharth
       Choudhary and Bhargava V. Dasai for the Respondents. . .
               '}"he Ju~gment of the Cou·rt was delivered by
     E         DALVEER BHANDARI, J. 1. Leave- granted.
               2. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of the High
         Court.of Judicature at Bombay dated 14.10.2005 delivered in
         Civil Writ Petition No. 9231 of 2003.
     F          3. The main grieva11c;;e which has been highlighted by the
       learned counsel for the appellant is regarding non-observance of
       the principles of natural justice. The appellant submitted that hearing
       .of the c;ase was closed for orders before the Caste Scrutiny
       Committee on 29 ..9.2003~hereafter, without notice to the.appellant,
     G ·ca~te Qertificate Register was called on 28.10.2003 and
       reptesen_tatives from the Office of the Tehsildar were called on
       7 .11' .2004. This approach of the Caste Scrutiny Committee is -
       clearly violative of the basic principles of natural justice.

---"''"' ...;~,"'-··' 4. According to the appellant, this grievance was clearly
       H articulated before the Division Bencli'"of·the High Court, but!~ ..
         /
               SHANTIDEVI KAMALESHKUMAR YADAV v. STATE 807
             OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]

          did not deal with this aspect of the matter, therefore, in the      A
          interest of justice the matter should be remanded to the Caste
          Scrutiny Committee for deciding the matter afresh after hearing
          the counsel for the parties.
               5. This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the
          appellant issued notice limited to the question as to whether       B
          the matter be remanded or not.
                6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length
          and carefully perused the documents on record. In the impugned
          judgment, there is no discussion regarding the main grievance       C
          of the appellant why the Caste Certificate Register was called
          for inspection on 28.10.2003 and the statement of the
          representative from the Office of the Tehsildar, Bombay City
          was recorded on 7.11.2003 after the conclusion of the hearing.
                7. We have heard learned counsel for the respondents at       o
          length but he could not give any satisfactory reply why the caste
          register was called for inspection and the statements of the
          representatives of the Office of the Tehsildar, Bombay were
          recorded after the conclusion of the hearing without any notice
          to the appellant.
                                                                              E
                8. In consonance with the principles of natural justice,
          equity; good conscience and fairness, we are compelled to set
          aside the impugned judgments of the High Court and the Caste
          Scrutiny Committee.       ·
               9. Consequently, we remit the matter to the Caste Scrutiny     F
          Committee to decide the case afresh after hearing the learned
          counsel for the parties. The Caste Scrutiny Committee must
          ensure that no hearing or deliberation takes place after the
          conclusion of hearing without notice to the appellant.
                                                                              G
                 10. The matter has been pending for several years,
~
    +-·   therefore, we request the Caste Scrutiny Committee to dispose
          of this case as expeditiously as possible. No further directions
          are necessary. This appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
          D.G.                                      Appeal disposed of.       H