TERRAFORM MAGNUM LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EVEREST BUILDCON LTD) vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Case Type: Civil Appeal

Date of Judgment: 30-05-2022

Preview image for TERRAFORM MAGNUM LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EVEREST BUILDCON LTD) vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Full Judgment Text

1 NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.  4500  OF 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NO.  2075 OF 2018) TERRAFORM MAGNUM LIMITED  (FORMERLY KNOWN AS  EVEREST BUILDCON LIMITED)   .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS         .....RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T B.R. GAVAI, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. IA   No.71779   of   2022   has   been   filed   to   bring   on   record   the subsequent   developments,   which   have   taken   place   during   the pendency of the appeal.   3. It is not necessary for us to go into the factual scenario in detail. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by GEETA AHUJA Date: 2022.06.08 15:56:03 IST Reason: Suffice it to say that the land in question originally belonged to one Hira Komb. Subsequently,  it changed  various  hands and  finally it 2 came in the hands of the present applicant/appellant.   4. After the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) came into effect, an application came to be filed for restoration of the said land in favour of the legal heirs of deceased Hira Komb.  There were various rounds of th litigation. Finally, the State Government by order dated 18  April 2016 impugned before the High Court, held that the land was liable to be restored to the legal heirs of deceased Hira Komb.   The same was challenged   by   the   present   appellant   before   the   High   Court.     The learned Single Judge of the High Court, by the impugned order dated th 15   December 2016, dismissed the writ petition being Writ Petition No. 7602 of 2016 filed by the appellant and maintained the order th dated 18  April 2016 passed by the State Government. 5. The same is challenged by way of the present appeal. 6. The main ground on which the respondents have been found to be entitled   to  restoration   is  a  caste   certificate   issued  in   favour  of respondent No.9­Dinesh Kishan Komb.   During the pendency of the th appeal, the Caste Scrutiny Committee, vide order dated 24  February 2020, has invalidated the claim of respondent No.9­Dinesh Kishan Komb.  7. In the present premises, the appellant has filed I.A. No. 71779 of 3 th 2022 in the present appeal for placing on record the order dated 24 February 2020 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidating the claim of respondent No.9­Dinesh Kishan Komb. By the said I.A., the appellant has also prayed for allowing the appeal since the very foundation on which the claim of respondents rested, no more exists.  8. We   have   heard   Mr.   Vinay   Navare,   learned   Senior   Counsel appearing   for   the   appellant,   Mr.   Sachin   Patil,   learned   counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra and Mr. Arpit Rai, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 18. 9. Mr. Patil submitted  that the  said  Act is a beneficial/ welfare legislation and merely because a claim of one of the legal heirs of Hira Komb is invalidated, it cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of said welfare legislation to the other legal heirs. 10. Incidentally, this argument is coming from the State and not from respondent Nos.4 to 18 who are the legal heirs of Hira Komb. 11. No   doubt,   that   the   said   enactment   is   a   beneficial/   welfare legislation enacted with the benevolent purpose of restoring the land to poor tribals whose lands were snatched away by the land grabbers. 12. However, the enactment is for the benefit of those tribals who really belong to the Scheduled Tribe. By the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De­notified Tribes ( ), Nomadic Vimukta Jatis 4 Tribes,   Other   Backward   Classes   and   Special   Backward   Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000, a mechanism has been provided to consider the genuineness of the claim of the persons claiming to belong to the Scheduled Tribe. Such a claim is required to be scrutinized by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Unless the  claim  is   validated   by  the  Caste  Scrutiny   Committee, a person cannot be treated to be put into the Scheduled Tribe. 13. Undisputedly, it is only respondent No.9­Dinesh Kishan Komb, who was having a certificate belonging to Scheduled Tribe.  No other legal heir of deceased Hira Komb is having a certificate of belonging to Scheduled Tribe.  th 14. By the Caste Scrutiny Committee’s order dated 24   February 2020, the very foundation of respondent No.9­Dinesh Kishan Komb belonging   to   a   Scheduled   Tribe   has   been   found   to   be   invalid. Therefore, we find that no purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. 15. We have specifically put a query to Mr. Rai as to whether any of the legal heirs of deceased Hira Komb propose to challenge the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee.  Learned counsel has emphatically stated that none of the legal heirs desire to do so. 16. In   that   view   of   the   matter,   since   the   very   foundation   that 5 respondent   Nos.4   to   18   belong   to   Scheduled   Tribe   is   no   more   in existence,   we   are   inclined   to   allow   the   application   as   well   as   the appeal. th 17. The order dated 24  February 2020 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee is placed on record. The application being I.A. No. 71779 of 2022 is allowed. 18. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the High th th Court dated 15  December 2016 and the order dated 18  April 2016 passed by the State Government are quashed and set aside.   There shall be no orders as to costs. 19. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. ……....................J.   (B.R. GAVAI)   ……....................J.                        (HIMA KOHLI) NEW DELHI; MAY 30, 2022. 6 ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 2075/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 15-12-2016 in CWP No. 7602/2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay) TERRAFORM MAGNUM LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EVEREST BUILDCON LTD) Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. Respondent(s) ( IA No. 71779/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION) Date : 30-05-2022 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI (VACATION BENCH) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gwen Karthika, Adv. Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Arpit Rai, Adv. Mr. Aviral Kashyap, AOR Mr. Shadab Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv. Ms. Shwetal Shepal, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The appeal as well as I.A. No. 71779 of 2022 is allowed in terms of the signed Non-Reportable Judgment. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Geeta Ahuja) (Ranjana Shailey) Assistant Registrar-cum-PS Court Master (Signed Non-Reportable Judgment is placed on the file)