1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. W.P.NO.2644/2006 Smt.Sitabai Gopalsingh Raghuvanshi .vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. Mr.S.R.Narnaware, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Fulzele, A.G.P. for the resp.nos.1 to 4. Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA and C. L. PANGARKAR, JJ. Dated : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2008. 1. Without going further in to merits of the matter, as learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on an order dated 11th September, 2007, passed in W.P.No.3717 of 2007 (Ku.Neeta Kashinath Sawarkar ..vs.. The State of Mah. and ors.), specifically in para no.4, which is reproduced as under - “4. Learned A.G.P. appearing for respondents has made available for our perusal original 2 record of proceedings before Respondent no.2 – Scrutiny Committee. It does indeed appear that the Research Officer of Scrutiny committee had entrusted home and other inquiries to Special District Social Welfare Officer. In view of this finding recorded by the Committee, on the basis of an inquiry conducted by Special District Social Welfare Officer, cannot at all be sustained since an inquiry through Vigilance Cell was necessary. Consequently, the impugned order of invalidation dated 2/8/2007 by respondent no.2 – Scrutiny committee and the resultant order of termination of petitioner's services passed on 9/7/2007 by respondent no.4 are quashed and set aside.” 2. In view of this, learned Assistant Government Pleader after taking instructions concedes this position. Therefore, the petition is allowed on same term, which is as under - We direct respondent no.2-Scrutiny Committee to re-examine the caste claim of the petitioner afresh after getting inquire conducted by 3 Vigilance Cell into the petitioner's caste claim, serving upon the petitioner report of the Vigilance Cell and affording the petitioner an opportunity to tender such evidence as she may desire to put in support of her caste claim. The petitioner shall appear before Respondent no.2 – Committee on 22nd September, 2008 with all relevant documents in support of her claim and shall continue to appear before the Committee on such date/s as may be given by the Committee without any further notice. The petitioner shall receive the report of the Vigilance Cell when furnished and shall promptly respond to the Vigilance Cell report within the time given by the Committee. The Committee shall decide the validity or otherwise of petitioner's caste claim within a period of six months from the date of this order. Respondent nos.3 and 4 (petitioner's employer) would be free to take appropriate action should be the decision on petitioner's claim be adverse to her eventually. The petition is accordingly allowed. JUDGE. JUDGE. chute 4