1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION ST. NO.1185 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7055 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 1ST FEBRUARY, 2010. 1. The grievance made before us is that the Court has directed recovery of Rs. 25,000/- from the Respondent No.2 Committee. The Respondent No.2 in the Writ Petition was the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar, Applicant No.1 herein. However, the caste claim of the Respondent No.1 herein was to be considered by the Committee for 2 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Nashik Division, Nashik, against whom the Court directive was issued to consider the matter expeditiously. 2. According to the Applicants, the Respondent No.2 in the Petition cannot be made responsible for the lapses on the part of Nashik Committee. That may be so, however, the fact remains that the direction issued by this Court in Writ Petition No.5915 of 2002 and Writ Petition No.6476 of 2005 is obviously against the concerned Scrutiny Committee which was expected to decide the caste claim of the Respondent No.1 expeditiously. 3. In Paragraph 12 - the operative order passed by us, there is no mention of the 3 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders fact that the amount of Rs.25,000/- should necessarily be recovered from the members of the Respondent No.2 Committee. On the contrary, the direction issued to the State of Maharashtra is to fix the responsibility of the erring committee members/officers/officials who were responsible for not complying with the order dated 25th April, 2008 passed by this Court and recover cost amount of Rs. 25,000/- from them. It is for the State to identify the erring committee members/ officers/officials who were responsible for not complying the directions contained in order dated 25th April, 2008. The State is expected to recover the cost amount from such members/officers/officials. 4. The grievance of the Applicants made 4 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders before us is, therefore, misplaced. No interference in exercise of review jurisdiction is warranted. Review Application is dismissed with the above directions. [S.S. SHINDE,J.] [A.M. KHANWILKAR,J.] asb/FEB10/rast1185.10