1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3293 OF 2001 Shri Seetalkumar Prabhakar Tawar ..... Petitioner. V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents. ------ Mr. R.K. Mendadkar for the petitioner. Mr. C.R. Sonawane for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. ------ CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & V.M. KANADE, JJ. DATE : 29th January, 2008. P.C.: 1. By this Petition, the Petitioner challenges the order passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, holding that the Caste Certificate issued in favour of the Petitioner certifying that he belongs to Koli (Dhor) Scheduled Tribe is invalid. The Scrutiny Committee has held that, in the primary school record of the petitioner’s father, the entry is Hindu Koli but in the secondary school record of his father the entry is Hindu Koli (Dhor). A finding has been recorded that, in to the bracket, the word “Dhor” was added subsequently. The Petitioner has filed an affidavit in the month of April 2007. Alongwith that affidavit, he has filed a Certificate issued by the same Scrutiny Committee dated 25/04/2006. By that Certificate, it is certified that Tawar Satish Prabhakar belongs to Koli (Dhor) Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner has filed alongwith that 2 affidavit, affidavit of Satish Prabhakar Tawar, wherein he has stated that the Petitioner is his real elder brother. Though this affidavit has been served on the Government in the month of April, 2007, they have not filed any rejoinder. Therefore, it appears from the record available before us that the same Scrutiny Committee has held that the brother of the Petitioner belongs to Koli (Dhor) Scheduled Tribe. In our opinion, therefore, in view of this subsequent development, the proper course to be followed is to direct the Scrutiny Committee to hold fresh inquiry into the matter. 2. In the result, therefore, the present Petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of the Scrutiny Committee dated 30/03/2001 is set aside. The inquiry is remitted back to the Scrutiny Committee for de novo consideration, hearing and decision in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3