1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4291 OF 2010 Pooja d/o Shankarrao Chinmalwar, Age 17 years, (Minor), Occu.Education, Through her natural guardian, i.e. father : Shankarrao Mogalji Chinmalwar, Age 45 years, Occu.Service R/o Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary 2. Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded ..RESPONDENTS Mr.S.S.Phatale. Advocate for petitioner Mr.S.K.Kadam, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondent No.1 Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for respondent No.2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4293 OF 2010 Sanjay s/o Shankarrao Chinmalwar, Age 12 years (Minor), Occu.Education, Through her natural guardian, i.e. father : Shankarrao Mogalji Chinmalwar, Age 45 years, Occu.Service R/o Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded ..PETITIONER 2 VERSUS 1. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary 2. Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded ..RESPONDENTS Mr.S.S.Phatale. Advocate for petitioner Mr.S.K.Kadam, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondent No.1 Mrs.Sarika Deshpande, Advocate holding for Mr.R.P.Phatke, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ DATE : 6th May 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) 1. The petitioners in both these petitions are related to each other and common question of facts and law are involved, as such these petitions are decided together by this common judgment. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 3 3. By the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners take exception to the order dated 14.12.2009 and order dated 11.12.2009, passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor and the order dated 26.2.2010 and order dated 25.2.2010, passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad in appeal thereby rejecting the applications of the petitioners for issuance of caste certificates as belonging to Koli Mahadev – Scheduled Tribe. 4. The petitioners along with the applications had submitted the caste certificate issued in favour of their father along with other evidence. 5. The Sub Divisional Officer rejected the applications of the petitioners solely on the ground that in the census record the caste of some of the relatives of the petitioners is mentioned as “Koli”. The Sub Divisional Officer failed to consider the material evidence in the shape of the caste certificate issued in favour of the father of the petitioners which is a sufficient evidence to issue caste certificate in favour of the petitioners. 6. In the light of the above, we allow this petition, quash and set aside the impugned orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor and the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad and 4 direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor to forthwith issue caste certificate to the petitioners as belonging to Koli Mahadev – Scheduled Tribe. 7. Rule thus made absolute on above terms with no order as to costs. ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/4291.10wp)