1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6117 OF 2010 Saibaba s/o Datta Shirgire, Age 41 years, Occ. Service, R/o Kuppa, Tq. Wadwani, District Beed, at present working at Z.P. Central Primary School, Kuppa, Tq. Wadwani, District Beed ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 2. Scheduled Tribe Caste Verification/ Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. 3. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed, District Beed ... RESPONDENTS (Notice of respondent No.1 to be served through Government Pleader, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad and notice of respondent No.2 & 3 be served on its Standing Counsels, High Court, Bench at Aurangabad) ..... Shri S.B. Gastgar, Advocate for petitioner Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 3 Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent No.2. ..... 2 CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 13th July, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V. HARDAS, 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. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the communication dated 14.5.2010, issued by respondent No.3, informing the petitioner that in the event the petitioner does not submit the validity certificate within stipulated period, the services of the petitioner were likely to be terminated. 3. Undisputedly, the petitioner came to be appointed as an untrained Assistant Teacher in the year 1995 on a post which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe category candidate. Subsequently, the certificate of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification and the said verification process is said to be pending. The petitioner, according to us, cannot be faulted for the delay which has arisen in the decision of his tribe claim. In that light of the matter, therefore, we allow this petition and quash and set aside the impugned 3 communication and further direct the petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 28.7.2010 and direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim/ tribe claim of the petitioner within one year from 28.7.2010. In the meantime, we direct the respondents not to take any adverse action against the petitioner till the decision of his caste claim/ tribe claim by the Scrutiny Committee. Obviously, further course of action would be dependent upon the decision of the Scrutiny Committee. Rule made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)