1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.3108/2009 [Mr. Santosh Shamsundar Wankhede .vrs. The State of Maharashtra and others] ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE AND P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 05, 2009. Heard Mr. M.P. Kariya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.S. Wandile, learned AGP for respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4 and Mr. S.M. Puranik, learned counsel for respondent no.2. The petitioner has been selected for the post of Ringman pursuant to the selection made by respondent no.4 and in the merit list he appears at Sr. No.1. The post of Ringman for which the petitioner has been selected is reserved for S.T. It is the case of the petitioner that the tribe claim of the petitioner has been referred to respondent no.2 Committee in October 2005 and till date no decision has been taken by the Committee. Since the post of Ringman is reserved for S.T., Respondent no.4 insisted upon production of validity certificate from the committee before issuing appointment order. It is the case 2 of the petitioner that since the tribe claim of the petitioner was not decided by the committee, he is not in a position to submit validity certificate which has been ordered to be produced by 23rd August, 2009. Mrs. Wandile, learned AGP states that since the post was served for S.T. the petitioner was directed to produce latest validity certificate on or before 23rd August, 2009 and since he has not produced validity certificate, mere selection would not giving right to the post of Ringman. Mrs. Wandile, learned AGP is not in a position to state as to whether the post of Ringman has been filled as on date. Mr. Puranik, learned counsel for respondent no.2 states that the committee shall decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within a period of six months. In view of the fact that the petitioner could not submit tribe validity certificate within time stipulated, we are not inclined to grant order directing respondent nos.1, 3 and 4 to appoint the petitioner as Ringman. However, in the event, respondent nos.1, 3 and 4 chose to fill up the post, the same shall be subject to decision of the Scrutiny Committee. In view of the statement made by Mr. Puranik, we direct respondent no.2 to decide tribe claim of the petitioner expeditiously and in any case before 30.3.2010. 3 Liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court in case the decision of the Committee is not in favour of the petitioner. Writ Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande