1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8928 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 8928 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 8928 OF 2007 Rukhsana Mushtaq Momin. .. Petitioner. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. Nitin Mulye i/by G.S. Godbole for Petitioner. Mr. V.P. Malvankar, AGP., for Respondent nos.1,3 to 5. Mr. S.S. Patwardhan for Respondent No. 2. CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission. 3. The short question for our consideration is : Whether the petitioner can continue as a municipal councillor of Ward No. 6 of Kolhapur Municipal Corporation on obtaining the certificate of validity 2 beyond the prescribed period of four months? 4. The petitioner contested the election for municipal councillor of Ward No. 6 of Kolhapur Municipal Corporation which was reserved for other backward class category and got elected. In terms of the provisions of Section 5B of the B.P.M.C. Act, 1949 the petitioner submitted an undertaking to submit the certificate of caste validity within a period of four months from the date of declaration of the results of the election 5. It is the case of the petitioner that despite the petitioner having pursued the matter with the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the Caste Scrutiny Committee failed to take a decision in the matter of her caste certificate within the stipulated period and, therefore, the petitioner could not comply with the undertaking and the impugned order came to be passed by the respondent Corporation. 6. This Court has taken a view in Writ Petition No. 5691 of 2007 (Dadasaheb Arjun Gulve vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors) with group of petitions i.e. Writ Petition Nos. 3793/07 and others that the requirement is not mandatory but directory in nature. Even otherwise, one cannot expect a citizen to perform an impossible task as the decision in the matter of caste claim of the petitioner was with the Caste 3 Scrutiny Committee and nothing has been placed on record that the petitioner prevented the Caste Scrutiny Committee from taking the decision in the matter. Therefore, in view of the fact that the Caste Scrutiny Committee having issued the certificate of validity in favour of the petitioner on 29.10.2007, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. 7. Needless to say that the petitioner would continue to hold the post of municipal corporation councillor. The Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.)