FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3253 OF 2011 “Choutrabai Narayanrao Parkad Vs. The Maharashtra SC, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis) NT, OBCS and SBC Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. S.V. Suryawashi, Advocate for the petitioner Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for the respondents. CORAM :- D.B. BHOSALE & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE :- 13TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2] In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs :- “(B) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby directing the respondent No.1 committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner pending before it within stipulated time and for that purpose issue necessary writ, order or direction. (C) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 not to take any coercive action against the petitioner for want of caste validity certificate and for that purpose issue necessary writ, order or direction.” FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3253 OF 2011 “Choutrabai Narayanrao Parkad Vs. The Maharashtra SC, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis) NT, OBCS and SBC Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 3] There is no dispute that the petitioner submitted proposal for verification of her caste claim in the office of respondent No.2 on 30/5/2010 i.e. before her election as a member of the Gram Panchayat. She contested the election in June, 2010 and got elected as a member of the Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, she contested the election for the post of Sarpanch from reserved category, namely, NT (C). While filing the nomination paper, she had also filed the proof of submitting proposal for verification of caste claim before the scrutiny committee. In view thereof, the petitioner was allowed to contest the election for the post of Sarpanch. Further there is no dispute that her proposal for verification of her caste claim was forwarded by the Collector, to respondent No.1 committee and it is pending before the said committee as of today. 4] Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that this petition can be conveniently disposed of ,by the following order :- : O R D E R : [I] Respondent No.1 – Scrutiny Committee shall consider and decide the petitioner's caste claim within a period of six FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3253 OF 2011 “Choutrabai Narayanrao Parkad Vs. The Maharashtra SC, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis) NT, OBCS and SBC Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. [ii] Petitioner is directed to remain present before the scrutiny committee on 4th July, 2011, alongwith a copy of this order. [iii] Till the caste claim of the petitioner is decided by the scrutiny committee, in pursuance of this order, she may be allowed to function as Sarpanch. [iv] Needless to mention that if the caste claim of the petitioner is rejected by the scrutiny committee, it would be open to the respondents to take appropriate action, against the petitioner immediately thereafter. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. An authenticated copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for parties, to act upon. [S.B. DESHMUKH,J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] grt/-