(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 637 OF 2009 Sunita Vishnu Najan, Age : 33 years, Occupation : Social Work, R/o. Gunfa, Taluka : Shevgaon, District : Ahmednagar. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Social Justice, Cultural Affairs and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Vimukta Jatis, Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category Class Divisional Caste Certificates Scrutiny Committee (Through its Member Secretary and Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Nashik Division), Nashik. 3. The Collector, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagar Division, Ahmednagar. (2) 5. The Tahsildar, Shevgaon, Taluka : Shevgaon, District : Ahmednagar. 6. Mirabai Diliprao Lande, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Joharapur, Taluka : Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. .. Respondents. .......................... Mr. N.V. Gaware, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1, 3, 4 and 5. Mr. B.L. Sagar Killarikar, Advocate, for respondent no.2. Mr. H.D. Deshmukh, Advocate, for respondent no.6. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 5TH AUGUST 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. (3) 2. The present petition impugns the caste validity certificate dated 28th March 2007 issued by respondent no.2 Committee in favour of respondent no.6. 3. It is the contention of the petition, that the validity certificate has been issued directly without there being any adjudication. 4. Though Mr. B.L. Sagar Killarikar, learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.2 Committee, states that some reasons could be found in the file, he fairly does not support the impugned order. 5. In the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of respondent no.2 Committee, the Committee has also stated that it would be in the interest of justice, that the matter is re-considered. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the petition. 6. In the result, the petition is allowed. (i) The impugned caste validity certificate dated 28th March 2007, issued by respondent no.2 Committee in favour of respondent no.6, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent no.2 Committee for considering the claim of the respondent no.6 afresh in accordance with law. (ii) The respondent no.6 shall remain present before the Committee on 17th August 2009 and, as such, the requirement of formal notice to respondent no.6 shall stand waived. (4) (iii) The Committee shall decide the caste claim of the respondent no.6 wilthin a period of two months from today. (iv) It is further directed that till the decision of the respondent no.2 Committee, on remand, regarding claim of the respondent no.6, the status quo with respect to the electoral office held by the respondent no.6, shall continue. (v) In the event, the petitioner desires to oppose the claim of the respondent no.6, he may file an application for intervention in the proceedings before the respondent no.2 Committee, which shall be decided on its own merits. 7. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/637wp