(1) WP - 4955.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4955 OF 2010 Ms. Renuka D/o Bharati Madane, Age : 18 years, Occu.: Student of First Year of B.Tech in Maharashtra Institute of Technology, Satara Road, Aurangabad R/o Malkhare Vihar-1, Flat No.406, Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. Ajay S. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Addl. G.P. for the Respondent-State. Ms. Geeta Deshpande, Advocate for the respondent no.3 ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 12TH JULY, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. The petitioner's grievance in the present Petition is that her claim that she belongs to the Hatkar Nomadic Tribe has been invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee on extraneous grounds. According to the petitioner, the Scrutiny Committee has not considered the documents produced by her in their (2) WP - 4955.2010 proper perspective and, therefore, the impugned order is incorrect and needs to be set aside. 2. We have perused the impugned order and we find that the criticism levelled by the learned Advocate for the petitioner against the impugned order is justified. The Scrutiny Committee has discarded all the documents produced by the petitioner only because her father's name does not figure on these documents. 3. In our opinion, the Scrutiny Committee has acted contrary to law. There is no rule which bars the mother's name being included in any certificate issued in the name of the child. Equally, there is no rule which requires only the father's name to be mentioned. Therefore, the decision of the Scrutiny Committee of discarding the certificates merely on this ground is not tenable. Furthermore, it appears that the petitioner had produced the certificate of validity issued to her uncle from the paternal side as well as her mother. These certificates ought to have been considered by the Committee before discarding the petitioner's claim. (3) WP - 4955.2010 4. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Scrutiny Committee to decide the petitioner's tribe claim afresh. The petitioner shall appear before the Committee on 16th August, 2011 @ 11.00 am. The Committee shall decide the claim within three (3) months from that date. 5. Till then, the respondent no.3 shall not take any adverse action against the petitioner only because her tribe claim has not been decided by the Scrutiny Committee. Petition disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] arp/