1 WP No.5009/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5009 of 2010 Mrs.Malan Anant Bhintade ... Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents ... Mr.Y.S.Jehagirdar, Sr.Advocate i/b Mr.R.K.Mendadkar for the petitioner. Mr. C.R.Sonawane, AGP for respondent nos.1, 2 and 4. Mr.R.S.Khadapkar for respondent no.3. Mr.S.B.Shetye for respondent no.5. Mr.Jaydeep Deo for respondent no.6. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ DATED : 11th October 2010 P.C. 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, petitioner challenges the order dated 23rd March 2010 passed by the Scrutiny Committee holding that the claim of the petitioner that she belongs to Kunbi OBC caste is not valid. The petitioner has challenged the order on various grounds. One of the grounds on which the order has been challenged is that in making the 2 WP No.5009/10 order, the Scrutiny Committee has not complied with the directions contained in circular dated 5th October 2009. Perusal of that circular shows that that circular has been issued pursuant to direction issued by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.6296 of 2009. It is common ground that the Scrutiny Committee has not followed many of the instructions contained in the circular dated 5th October 2009. In making the order which is impugned in this petition, in this view of the matter therefore, there is no option but to set aside the impugned order. In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed. 3. The order impugned is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Scrutiny Committee for denovo enquiry and decision in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above, the Scrutiny Committee shall make a fresh order as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of three months from today. 4. As the order of the Scrutiny Committee holding that the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner that she belongs to Kunbi OBC caste is not valid is set aside, the petitioner would continue to hold her elective office in accordance with the law. 5. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J)