1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3491 OF 2007 Dayanand s/o Hiraji Sontakke, R/o-Tuljapur, Post-Tuljapur, Tq-Tuljapur, Dist-Osmanabad. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, 2) The Secretary, Education Department, State of Maharashtra, Sachivalaya, Bombay, 3) The Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Scrutiny Committee, Pune Division, Govt. of Maharashtra Tribal Development Department, Tribal Research Training Institute, Maharashtra State, Pune, 4) Arvind Dhareppa Umbarje, Occu: H.M. Shri Kulswamini Vidyalaya Tuljapur, Tq-Tuljapur, Dist-Osmanabad, 5) The Secretary, Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Andur, Tq-Tuljapur, Dist-Osmanabad. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 ... Shri. S.K. Rahane Advocate for Petitioner. Shri. V.D. Godbharle, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri.R.P. Phatke, Advocate for Respondent No.3. Shri.K.K. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No.4. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATE : 19TH NOVEMBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The Petitioner is a teacher in a school wherein the Respondent No.4 is a Head Master. The caste claim of Respondent No.4 as belonging to "Mahadev Koli" was verified by the Scrutiny Committee and by order dated 21st May, 2007 the Scrutiny Committee held that the Respondent No.4 belongs to "Koli Mahadev". The Caste Certificate issued by Tahsildar and Executive Magistrate, South Solapur, District-Solapur dated 28th August 1990, was held valid. 3 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner raises sole question to challenge the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee in favour of Respondent No.4 on the ground that in the birth and death register record, the caste of the Petitioner's father was stated to be "Koli". The counsel by placing reliance on the Reported Judgment in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, A.I.R. 1995 S.C. Page 94, submits that the document showing the caste of the Petitioner's father as "Koli", being the oldest document, the Committee ought not to have held in favour of Respondent No.4 and the caste certificate of Respondent No.4 ought to have been cancelled. 4. We have perused the record placed before us along with the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 21st May, 2007. We find that in all 17 relatives of the Respondent No.4, who claim to be belonging to "Mahadev Koli", got validity 4 certificates. The Respondent No.4 placed reliance on the orders passed by the High Court in respect of the caste claims of his cousin, nephew, and uncle. 5. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee. In exercise of our extra ordinary writ jurisdiction, we do not find that the Petitioner has made out case for interference. The Writ Petition is dismissed. [SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/NOV10/wp3491.07