1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5107 OF 2010 Prabhakar s/o Kerba Bichakate, Age 20 years, Occ. Student, R/o New Adarsh Colony, Ausa Road, Sawant Niwas, Srinagar, Latur ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Medical Education and Research, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Director of Medical Education and Research, Mumbai. 3. The Government Medical College, Aurangabad, through its Dean. 4. Divisional Caste Certificate Verification Committee-2, Latur, through its Secretary (Copy for R.Nos.1 to 4 served on Govt. Pleader’s Office at High Court, Aurangabad) 5. The Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nasik, through its Registrar (Copy served on Standing Counsel) ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri M.V. Ghatge, Advocate for petitioner, Shri S.K. Tambe, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 4 Shri K.D. Bade Patil, Advocate for respondent No.5. ..... 2 CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 29th June, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER 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 prays for issuance of a writ for quashing and setting aside the communication dated 4.6.2010, issued by respondent No.3, informing the petitioner that on his failure to submit the validity certificate, the admission of the petitioner would be cancelled. 3. Undisputedly, the petitioner has secured admission on a seat which was reserved for N.T. Category. The claim of the petitioner has been referred to Scrutiny Committee and the said claim is pending consideration with the respondent Scrutiny Committee. Apart from the question whether the petitioner is responsible for the delay in pendency of his claim before the Scrutiny Committee, we are inclined to allow this petition and quash and set aside the impugned communication. We further direct the petitioner to appear before the 3 Committee on 12th July 2010 and further direct the Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within three months of 12th July 2010. The admission of the petitioner would obviously be subject to the decision of the Scrutiny Committee. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)