HC directs panel to decide corporator’s caste claim

  • | Monday | 5th November, 2018

After filing the writ petition, Jadhav also filed a complaint with the caste validity committee on April 21, 2016. Through a writ petition, she has challenged the validity of caste certificate issued to Waghule, a convert. It shall give decision on the complaint. Prior to reopening the proceeding, the committee will be required to take decision on the complaint of the petitioner after hearing the respondent (Waghule). The committee shall thereafter take a decision about issuance of validity in favour of Waghule.”The bench further clarified that “only in case of fraud, the committee will be entitled to reopen the proceedings.

Aurangabad: The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court recently directed the caste verification committee to have a re-look into the caste claims of Sangita Subhash Waghule, who got elected as a corporator in the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) from the ward reserved for other backward class category.Pooja Anil Jadhav, who belongs to Kunbi community, had contested the AMC elections in 2015 from ward number 34. The constituency was reserved for women belonging to OBC category. Through a writ petition, she has challenged the validity of caste certificate issued to Waghule, a convert. She won the election and her caste certificate was deemed valid.Jadhav claimed that Waghule belonged to the a community that falls under scheduled caste category and had converted to Christianity (which falls under OBC category). After filing the writ petition, Jadhav also filed a complaint with the caste validity committee on April 21, 2016. She received a reply from the committee on April 27, 2016.Madhur Golegaonkar, who represented Waghule, argued that “As per the rules, if the committee is satisfied with the documents produced, then vigilance is not required to be conducted. The documents produced by Waghule about her Baptism are genuine and issued by the registered Church.’’While disposing of the matter on October 26, Justice S V Gangapurwala and Justice R G Avachat observed “in the present matter, we are not going through the genuineness of the documents produced. The petitioner, after filing the petition, has approached the committee.”The court observed that “The committee may decide the complaint and may issue notice to Waghule, who may then file a say on the complaint. The committee shall thereafter take a decision about issuance of validity in favour of Waghule.”The bench further clarified that “only in case of fraud, the committee will be entitled to reopen the proceedings. Prior to reopening the proceeding, the committee will be required to take decision on the complaint of the petitioner after hearing the respondent (Waghule). It shall give decision on the complaint. Same shall be done within a period of six months from appearance of the parties.”The bench further stated that “if the committee comes to the conclusion of reopening the case, then the parties have liberty to take appropriate steps.”

If You Like This Story, Support NYOOOZ

NYOOOZ SUPPORTER

NYOOOZ FRIEND

Your support to NYOOOZ will help us to continue create and publish news for and from smaller cities, which also need equal voice as much as citizens living in bigger cities have through mainstream media organizations.


Stay updated with all the Latest Aurangabad headlines here. For more exclusive & live news updates from all around India, stay connected with NYOOOZ.

Related Articles