(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Writ Petition No. 4533 of 2008 (Aurangabad) (i.e. Writ Petition No. 8821 of 2007 (Bombay)) Subhash Sadashiv Ghule, Aged : 32 years, Gramsevak, Panchayat Samiti, Jamner, C/o. 8/B, Kamgar Nagar, Kurla (E), Mumbai - 400 024. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032. 2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik Division, through its Member Secretary, having its office at Adivashi Vikas Bhavan, Old Agra Road, Nashik. 3. Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, through its Chief Executive Officer. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. R.K. Mendadkar, Advocate, for the petitioner. (2) Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent no.1. Mr. R.P. Phatke, Advocate, for respondent no.2. Mr. M.S. Sonawane Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.3. ........................ CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per A.P. Deshpande, J.) : 1. Apprehending termination of service on account of non-submission of caste / tribe validity certificate, the present petition has been filed claiming protection in that regard. 2. The petitioner came to be appointed as a Gramsevak in the services of the respondent no.3 / Zilla Parishad, against a post reserved for a Scheduled Tribe candidate. It appears that the petitioner represented that he belongs to "Koli Mahadeo" tribe and hence on successful completion of the selection process, he came to be appointed as Gramsevak. The said appointment was subject to caste / tribe verification. (3) 3. The Zilla Parishad called upon the petitioner to submit necessary documents so as to facilitate forwarding his case for caste / tribe claim for verification. However, the petitioner did not submit any document. On the contrary, by communication dated 26-11-2007, the petitioner informed the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, that he had been to the office of the Scrutiny Committee at Amaravati twice or thrice, but the Scrutiny Committee declined to accept the same and informed the petitioner that the proposal for caste / tribe verification need to be forwarded through the office. It is then stated that during the intervening period, on 7-8-2006, because of flood, water entered in the house of the petitioner, destroying everything in the house, including all papers. It is then categorically stated that the petitioner is not in a position to furnish the documents which are required for verification of the caste / tribe claim. 4. Perusal of the Writ Petition gives an impression that the petitioner's caste / tribe claim is pending with the Committee and in that regard, even a direction is sought against the Committee to decide the caste / tribe claim within a stipulated time frame. Prima facie, we are of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to any protection having regard to his conduct, from apprehended action of termination. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this petition. (4) 5. At this stage, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would approach the respondent no.3 / Zilla Parishad with whatever documents he has, so that the caste / tribe verification case, though incomplete, could be forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee for verification of the caste / tribe claim. 6. We grant liberty to the petitioner to follow the said course by approaching respondent no.3. 7. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, in view of the liberty granted to approach the respondent no.3 with a request to forward the proposal to respondent no.2, seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Petition. Permission granted. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed, as withdrawn, with liberty as indicated above. Needless to mention, that the interim order stands vacated. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( A.P. DESHPANDE ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp4533