1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7358 OF 2010 Trimbak s/o Ganpatrao Khapekar, Age 45 years, Occ. Service, presently working as Full Time Teacher, Government Technical High School, Jamner, Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Caste Claims, Nagpur, District Nagpur. 3. The Deputy Director of Vocational Education and Training, Regional Office, Old Agra Road, Nasik, District Nasik. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri S.R. Barlinge, Advocate for the petitioner Shri N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 3 Shri R.P. Phatke, Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM: R.S. MOHITE & SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATED: 30th August, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent 2 of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage. 2. By the present petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ to quash and set aside the impugned letter dated 15.1.2010, issued by respondent No.3 (Exhibit E) and also prayed for directions that the respondent No.2 Committee be directed to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within the period of three months, and further prayed for issuance of directions that the respondent No.3 be directed not to take any adverse action against the petitioner till his tribe claim is decided by the Scrutiny Committee i.e. respondent No.2. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that he was appointed as Full Time Teacher in Government Technical High School, Jamner on 3.12.1999. Thereafter, the Head Master of the said School referred his tribe/caste claim to the Scrutiny Committee at Nasik vide letter dated 17.10.2003. Accordingly, the Nasik Committee referred it to the Committee at Nagpur on 29.10.2003 since the caste certificate of the petitioner was belonging to Nagpur region. 4. It is also the contention of the petitioner that, after reference of his tribe claim to the Scrutiny Committee at Nagpur, he visited the said 3 Committee and requested the members to decide it expeditiously. However, he was informed that the Committee had several claims pending and as such, when the Committee calls him for interview, he should remain present for the interview. Hence, the petitioner has no alternative but to wait for the decision of the respondent No.2 Committee. 5. It is further the contention of the petitioner that he has completed more than ten years of service as Full Time Teacher and he is confident that his tribe claim would be validated by the respondent No.2 Committee. However, the respondent No.3 has issued a letter dated 25.11.2009, directing the petitioner to produce the caste validity certificate on or before 10.12.2009, failing which he was threatened that action of termination of his service would be initiated against him. After receipt of the said lette, the petitioner has submitted his explanation to the respondent No.3 on the very day i.e. 10.12.2009. However, despite giving explanation by the petitioner in respect of delay in getting the caste validity certificate from the Scrutiny Committee, the respondent No. 3 again issued notice dated 15.1.2010 to produce the validity certificate within 15 days. 6. It is the contention of the petitioner that for no fault of the petitioner, he is facing the termination of the services and, therefore, approached to this Court by way of present Writ Petition for the 4 directions as set out hereinabove. 7. It is apparent from the aforesaid averments that, the reference made by the Head Master of the Government Technical High School, Jamner of the tribe claim of the petitioner is pending with the respondent No.2 for the substantial period i.e. for almost about seven years and hence, it is necessary to direct the respondent No.2 Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within the specified period and it is also necessary to direct the respondent No.3 not to take any adverse action against the petitioner till the decision of the tribe claim of the petitioner. 8. In the result, present petition succeeds and respondent No.2 is directed to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within the period of six months from today and communicate to the petitioner accordingly and respondent No.3 is directed not to take any adverse action against the petitioner till then and with the said directions, present petition stands disposed of. 9. Rule made absolute accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.)