{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4947 OF 2009 Abhay Marotirao Chilkawar Age-Minor, Occ-Education Through natural guardian, father R/o Degloor, Tq-Degloor 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.R.P.Phatake, Advocate for respondent No.2 ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 30th July 2009 {2} 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 admission. 2. The petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the judgment and order dated 30.03.2009 passed by the Scrutiny Committee confirming the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor dated 05.02.2009 by which the Sub Divisional Officer has rejected the application submitted by the father of the petitioner on his behalf for issuance a caste certificate claiming that the petitioner belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. It appears that the petitioner had submitted an application through his father before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor praying for issuance of a caste certificate claiming that he belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner has submitted various documents, including caste certificate issued in favour of the father of the petitioner as well as in favour of his three real sisters, along with the application. The Sub Divisional Officer, vide order dated 05.02.2009, rejected the application of the petitioner observing that the documents produced along with the {3} application are not sufficient to hold that the petitioner is entitled to claim caste certificate. It further appears that being aggrieved by the said rejection, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Scrutiny Committee, which also came to be dismissed by the Scrutiny Committee, vide its judgment and order dated 30.03.2009 by observing that “the Scrutiny Committee deeply observed the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and the documentary evidence submitted by the appellant along with the proposal and the Committee have come to the conclusion that the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, is satisfactory and therefore the committee is agreed with the decision of the Sub Divisional Officer and hence the said appeal is rejected”. 5. We have perused the documents. It appears that the father of the petitioner and his three real sisters have been issued caste certificates which are duly verified by the competent Scrutiny Committee and inspite of this the Sub Divisional Officer has observed that these documents are not sufficient to issue caste certificate to the petitioner. It appears that the Sub Divisional Officer and the Scrutiny Committee have not considered these documents, which clearly demonstrates non application of mind. Therefore, we allow this petition and quash and set aide the orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 30.03.2009 and by the Sub Divisional Officer dated 05.02.2009. We direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor to issue caste certificate to the petitioner. {4} 6. It goes without saying that the caste certificate would be subject to verification by the competent authority. 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/wp4947-09