HC upholds removal of chairman, members of State SC/ST Commission

Bombay High Court upholds the removal of chairman and two members of Maharashtra State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by the state government. The petitioners claimed the action was arbitrary, but the court rejected their plea.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has upheld removal of the chairman and two members of the Maharashtra State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by the Eknath Shinde-led government in December 2022. The petitioners had claimed that the action was arbitrary and hence should be set aside.

HT Image

The HC, however, held that changes in the government were part of the democratic process and change in policy decisions could not be termed as arbitrary or mala-fide and rejected the petition filed by them.

The division bench of justice Gautam Patel and justice Neela Gokhale was hearing the petition of Ramhari Shinde, Kishore Medhe and Jagannath Abhyankar. The bench was informed by advocate Satish Talekar that the petition was challenging the December 2, 2022, government order (GO) which cancelled appointments of as many as 197 presidents and non-official members appointed on 29 Project Level (Planning Review) Committees in the tribal sub-plan projects.

All three were part of the Maharashtra State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. While Abhyankar was holding the post of chairman, Shinde and Medhe were appointed as its members for a three-year term in 2021. Their appointments were cancelled by the GO along with that of several others.

Talekar submitted that the petitioners were aggrieved by cancellation of various appointments of non-official members and other members of the statutory boards, committees, commissions etc., including their own appointments.

The petitioners alleged that the changes were made by the chief minister/deputy chief minister only with a view to accommodate the supporters and workers of the ruling dispensation. Talekar added that the discontinuation, cancellation, and modification of decisions of the earlier government were against public interest.

Advocate general Birendra Saraf for the state government defended the government’s decision, stating that the concerned posts were not statutory posts and the members of the commission served at the pleasure of the government, hence the decision was justified. The bench accepted the submissions advanced by the advocate general.

“In view of the legal position that the commission has no statutory nor constitutional recognition, we have no hesitation in holding that the order cancelling the appointments of the petitioners to the posts of chairman/members of the commission respectively cannot be said to be illegal, unlawful or otherwise vulnerable. No fundamental right to continue in the said posts is vested in the petitioners. The GO dated 2nd December 2022 cancelling their appointment cannot be held arbitrary or discriminatory.”