1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11488 OF 2010 Jitendra Bapurao Chavan, Age 44 years, Occ. Agriculture R/o. Pilkhod, Taluka Chalisgaon Dist. Jalgaon. Petitioner Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra through its Department of Rural Developments Mantralaya, Mumai-32. 2] The Collector, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. 3] The State Election Commission Maharashtra State. 4] The Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar. Respondents Mr. S.P. Shah, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.P. Phatke, Advocate for respondent No.4 Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 Mr. U.S. Malte, Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ.. DATE : 21st December, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [PER R.M. BORDE, J.] :- 2 1] Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2] The petitioner claims that he belongs to Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe. He has contested the election to the Zilla Parishad, in the year 2007 and he is the elected candidate. It is the contention of the petitioner that in 2007,the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee, for considering the validity of his caste claim. However, the Scrutiny committee has not rendered any decision till this date. It is also pointed out by the petitioner that , at the time of presentation of the nomination paper he has tendered an undertaking in the prescribed proforma that he would present the validity certificate within a period of 4 months. However, although the caste claim of the petitioner was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee for consideration, as yet, no decision is rendered by the committee. 3] It is not within the powers of the petitioner to secure a decision from the Scrutiny Committee within the prescribed period. The petitioner apprehends that as a result of his failure to present the validity Certificate, adverse action would be taken and he will have to loose the elected office. 4] Considering the facts and circumstances, it is desirable to direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner. The writ petition is allowed. The respondent NO.2 is directed to decide the caste claim of the petitioner which is forwarded to it within a period of six months from today. In the meantime, it is directed, that the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall not take any adverse action against the petitioner and shall not declare the petitioner to be disqualified on account of failure on his part to produce the validity certificate within the prescribed time. 3 5] The petitioner undertakes to appear before the committee for the purpose of further inquiry on 17th January, 2011. As such, the requirement of formal notice stands waived. Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms. In the circumstances, there shall be no orders as to costs. [R.M. BORDE,J] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp