FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2970/2006 (Vijay Radhakisan Tapre vs. The State of Maharashtra & others) WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2972/2006 (Jagannath Kasgurai Kale vs. State of Maharashtra and another) WITH WRIT PETITOIN NO. 2975/2006 (Ku. Rekha Madhukar Mankar vs. The State of Maharashtra and another) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Shri Anil Mardikar, Adv. for petitioner Smt.K.H.Joshi, AGP, for R-1 Smt. Gayaki, Adv. for R-2 Shri S.M.Puranik, Adv. for R-3. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND S.R.DONGAONKAR, JJ DATED : 16 th JUNE, 2008. In all these petitions, common grievance is made by the respective petitioners. According to them, the Scrutiny Committee has not communicated any adverse order passed against the petitioners so far. That position is stated in the petition on affidavit. Respondent No.2 has also supported that grievance of the petitioners on affidavit. The Scrutiny Committee, on the other hand, on affidavit sworn by Research Officer has categorically averred that after the order was passed invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner in the respective cases, copy thereof was forwarded not only to the concerned petitioner, but also to respondent No.2 by R.P.D.A. However, when called upon to produce acknowledgment, to establish the factum of service of said communication to the petitioner or to respondent no.2, as the case may be, the counsel appearing for the Committee expressed inability to do so as it is not found in the record of the respective cases. The fact that the said communication was forwarded accompanied by order passed by the Committee invalidating the caste claim of the respective petitioner is reinforced from the outward entry and the R.P.A.D receipt. That is not sufficient to establish the factum of service, unless the acknowledgment was to be produced. In this peculiar situation, we have to acceed to the request of the petitioners to permit respective petitioner to withdraw the present writ petition(s) with liberty to file fresh writ petition so as to challenge the order passed against each of them by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating their caste claim. Accordingly these petitions are allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners shall file fresh writ petitions not later than four weeks from today, which, if filed in time, will be considered on its own merits. All questions in that behalf are kept open. Since the interim protection granted to the petitioner has enured since 2006, in the interest of justice, the same is continued for further period of four weeks from today. JUDGE JUDGE Rvjalit