1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4824 OF 2009 Yogeshwar S/o.Laxman Kandhare Age-21 years, Occu-Education, R/o. At-Post-Degloor, Tq.Degloor, District : Nanded PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through secretary to Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee Aurangabad, Through its Dy.Director (R), Aurangabad 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, District : Nanded RESPONDENTS Mr.S.M.Vibhute, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr.V.B.Ghadge, learned AGP for respondent no.1 and 3 Mr.R.P.Phatke, learned counsel for respondent no.2 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 27/07/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 2 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this writ petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, dated 12/12/2008 and the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 30/03/2009 confirming the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer. 3. The petitioner who was desirous of obtaining a caste certificate for his son, submitted an application relying on several documents. The document on which reliance was placed was the caste certificate issued to the father of the petitioner. The Sub Divisional Officer however rejected the said application by observing that issuance of the caste certificate to the father would not entitle the petitioner to be issued with a caste certificate. 4. According to us since father of the petitioner has been issued a caste certificate as belonging to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe, the petitioner is entitled to be issued with the certificate. 5. Accordingly this petition succeeds. Impugned orders are hereby quashed and set aside and the Sub Divisional Officer Degloor is directed to forthwith issue caste certificate to the petitioner. 3 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JULY 2009/wp4824-09 4