{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6702 OF 2009 Kailash s/o Mohanrao Perke Age-19 years, Occ-Education R/o Manjaram, Tq-Naigaon (Kh) Dist-Nanded PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad Through its Deputy Director (R) 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Dist-Nanded RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.S.M.Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner Mr.N.N.Jadhav, AGP for respondents No.1 and 3 Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for respondent No.2 ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE: 7th October 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.V.POTDAR, J.) : 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of {2} admission. 2. By the present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 21.07.2009 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor dated 14.05.2009, by which the Sub Divisional Officer had rejected the application of the petitioner. 3. At the outset, the facts which gave rise to file the present petition can be summarized thus- The petitioner had filed an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor seeking caste certificate claiming to the belonging to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner had submitted various documents along with the application including caste validity certificate issued to his real uncle and the affidavit of his uncle showing the genealogy. It appears that the Sub Divisional Officer, vide his order dated 14.05.2009, rejected the said application by observing that the documents submitted by the petitioner along with the application are not sufficient to issue the caste certificate as claimed for. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad. However, the Scrutiny Committee dismissed the appeal and uphold the order of the Sub Divisional Officer. These orders are impugned in the present petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. {3} 5. Learned counsel for petitioner invited our attention towards the caste validity certificate issued to the real uncle of the petitioner by the Scrutiny Committee on 04.01.2006. The petitioner had produced this caste validity certificate along with affidavit of his real uncle showing the genealogy and interse relation between the petitioner and the caste validity certificate holder, before the Sub Division Officer and Scrutiny Committee. The said documents prima facie indicate that the petitioner belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe. It appears that these documents are not properly appreciated either by the Sub Divisional Officer or by the Scrutiny Committee while erroneously rejecting the claim of the petitioner. In the premise, the impugned order, which are passed erroneously, are liable to be quashed and set aside. In the result, this petition succeeds. We hereby quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 21.07.2009 passed by the Scrutiny Committee and dated 14.05.2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor. We direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor to issue caste certificate to the petitioner to the effect that he belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe, forthwith. 6. Needless to state that the caste certificate to be issued will be subject to verification by the competent scrutiny committee. 7. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/wp6702-09