1 wp1283.06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1283 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3741 OF 2011 01. Rajendra s/o Sangram Shamante age 30 years, occupation : nil, r/of Gandhi Nagar, Biloli, District Nanded. Petitioner versus 01. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Tribe Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 02. The Scheduled Tribe Cast Verification Committee, MS, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, through its Director/ Chairman. 03. The Taluka Executive Magistrate Biloli, District Nanded. 04. The Collector, Collectorate, Nanded. 05. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nanded. Respondents ---- Shri A.S. Golegaonkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri N.B. Patil, AGP, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2 wp1283.06 Corum: Smt. Nishita Mhatre and M.T. Joshi, JJ. Date : 1st August, 2011. Oral judgment (Per: Smt. Mhatre, J.) 01. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith. The petitioner has approached this court against the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, dismissing his claim that he belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe.. 02. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the letter dated 17.7.2005 received by him, indicating that the hearing in respect of his tribe claim would be held on 28.7.2005. The petitioner, on 25.7.2005 had requested the committee, in writing, to adjourn the date of enquiry from 28.7.2005 to a later date as it was not possible for him to be present on that date. However, it appears that the the scrutiny committee closed the matter for orders on 6.7.2005 and passed the order on 18.8.2005 without considering the petitioner's application for an adjournment. The Scrutiny committee, in stead, noted that despite the directions issued to the applicant i.e. the petitioner herein, to be present on 6.7.2005 for a personal hearing, he did not attend the hearing and, therefore, the committee 3 wp1283.06 decided the matter on the basis of the documents available and the report of the vigilance cell. 03. Unfortunately, the committee has not noted the fact that it had issued one letter on 16.7.2005 and another on 17.7.2005 to the petitioner calling upon him to be present before it on 28.7.2005 for the hearing. Although the letter dated 16.7.2005 has not been received by the petitioner, he did receive the letter dated 17.7.2005, and sought an adjournment by is letter dated 25.7.2005. 04. It appears from the impugned order that the committee had closed the hearing of the matter on 6.7.2005, but while passing the order on 18.8.2005, it had not cared to note that, in fact, it had called upon the petitioner to be present on 28.7.2005 before it. The decision of the committee reveals that the claim of the petitioner has been decided exparte, without affording a hearing to the petitioner which is mandatory under the he Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 and the rules made thereunder. 4 wp1283.06 05. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the scrutiny committee, Aurangabad. The committee shall decide the petitioner's tribe claim within four months from today. The petitioner shall appear before the committee on 22.8.2011. 06. The petition is allowed. Rule made absolute, accordingly. Civil Application stands disposed of, accordingly. (M.T. JOSHI, J.) (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) pnd/wp1283.06