(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1575 OF 1999 Bramhanand s/o. Narendra Swamy, Aged : 25 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Yamuna Housing Society, Behind Bandhkam Bhavan, Old Ausa Road, Latur, at present working as Lecturer in Pharmacy College at Malegaon, Taluka : Baramati, District : Pune. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Caste Verification Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division (through its Chairman and Divisional Social Welfare Officer), Aurangabad. 3. The Taluka Executive Magistrate, Latur. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. U.R. Awate, Advocate, holding for Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.G. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 3. (2) ........................ CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 11TH AUGUST 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 28th July 1998, passed by the respondent no.2 / Caste Verification Scrutiny Committee, thereby invalidating the claim of the petitioner, of belonging to "Beda Jangum", Scheduled Caste. 2. Mr. U.R. Awate, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the respondent / Scrutiny Committee has failed to take into consideration the material on record. He further submits that though the matter was heard by two Members of the Committee, the order is signed by three persons who had not at all interviewed the petitioner. 3. Mr. K.G. Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, submits that the respondent / Scrutiny Committee, on considering the material on record, has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner. (3) 4. The petition will have to be allowed on a short ground. The petitioner has made a specific averment in the petition, that he was interviewed by two Members of the Committee, namely, the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Aurangabad, and the District Social Welfare Officer, Aurangabad, whereas the impugned order is signed by three members, who were altogether different officers than who had interviewed the petitioner. It is a settled principle of law, flowing from principles of natural justice, that a person, who hears the matter, must decide the matter. The same has been violated in the present matter. As such, the petition will have to be allowed. 5. In the result, the petition is partly allowed. (i) The impugned order dated 28th July 1998, passed by the respondent no.2 / Scrutiny Committee, thereby invalidating caste claim of the petitioner, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Caste Verification Scrutiny Committee at Latur, for deciding the caste claim of the petitioner, afresh, in accordance with law and after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Caste Verification Scrutiny Committee at Latur on 30th August 2010. (4) (iii) The respondent no.2 / Scrutiny Committee shall decide the caste claim of the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the petitioner before the Committee. 6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp1575