1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.3293 OF 2010 Miss Chitra Vishwanath Kakulte : Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents .... Mr.Sagar A. Mane i/b. Mr.N.V.Bandiwadekar for the petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent nos.1 & 2. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : JULY 09, 2010. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the respondent nos.1 & 2 waives service. Heard the petition finally on merits by consent of the parties. 3. This Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 30.1.2010 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nasik 2 Division, Nasik (Respondent no.2), whereby the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe came to be invalidated. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order is violative of the principles of natural justice since the copy of the Vigilance Cell report dated 14.8.2009 was not furnished to the petitioner by the Committee before passing the impugned order. It is, therefore, contended that the order is liable to be quashed and set aside on this ground. 5. The learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, on instructions from Mr.M.K.More, Research Officer of the Committee, does not dispute this factual aspect of the matter. 6. Considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the parties. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that copy of the Vigilance Cell report was not furnished to the petitioner. In the absence thereof, the petitioner undoubtedly did not get an opportunity to put forth her case before the Caste Scrutiny Committee nor could she submit her explanation or reply in this regard. Non-furnishing of the Police Vigilance Cell report to the petitioner amounts to denial of an opportunity 3 to the petitioner to put up her defence before the Committee and, therefore, the order impugned, in our view, is violative of the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained in law. 7. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the impugned order dated 30.1.2010 passed by the Committee is quashed and set aside. A copy of the Vigilance Cell report is handed over by the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader to the learned counsel for the petitioner in the Court. The matter is remanded to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to reconsider the caste claim of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard. The petitioner is entitled to file reply to the Vigilance Cell report within a period of three weeks from today. The Caste Scrutiny Committee to conclude the verification proceedings as early as possible and in any case not beyond a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. 8. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)