1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2470 OF 2010 Akash s/o Jagdish Maindarkar, Age 26 years, Occu.Agril., R/o Ganesh Nagar, Pathri, Taluka Pathri, Dist.Parbhani .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary in the Department of Social Welfare, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 2. The Schedule Castes, Schedule Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes & Special Backward Category Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad 3. The Collector, Parbhani, District Parbhani 4. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Pathri, Taluka Pathri, District Parbhani 5. The Election Officer, Municipal Council, Pathri, Taluka Pathri, District Parbhani 6. The State Election Commissioner, Through its Secretary, Office of the State Election Commission, Maharashtra State, Mumbai .. RESPONDENTS 2 Shri Amit Mukhedkar, Advocate for petitioner Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar, Asstt. Govt.Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 Shri P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel for respondents 4 and 5 Shri S.T.Shelke, Advocate for respondent No.6 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ DATE : 24th March 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 has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to accept the nomination form of the petitioner for the forthcoming elections to the Pathri Municipal, Pathri, District Parbhani in respect of a seat reserved for other backward class. According to the petitioner the claim is pending adjudication before the respondent – scrutiny committee since January 2010 and as he is desirous of contesting the elections, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 3. Shri Mukhedkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner very fairly stated that the aforesaid relief has become infructuous in the light of the fact that the last date of submission of nomination 3 paper is already over. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, states that the respondent – scrutiny committee be directed to decide the caste claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. 4. In the light of above, we dismiss the petition insofar as it relates to the relief of directing the respondents to accept the nomination paper of the petitioner and not to insist upon the production of the validity certificate. Insofar as the relief of directing the committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner expeditiously, we allow this petition and direct the respondent – scrutiny committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within six months of 31st March 2010. We accordingly direct the petitioner to appear before the committee on 31st March 2010. 5. Rule is thus made partly absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/wp2470.10wp)