1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8590 of 2010 in REV.APPLICATION ST.NO.16309/2010 IN W.P.NO. 2169/2000. Zamirkhan S/o Umardarjkhan Pathan ... Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.U.R.Awate, advocate holding for Mr.S.B.Talekar, advocate for the applicant. Mr.S.N.Kendre, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.P.S.Patil, advocate for the Respondent No.2. ... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 21.07.2010. ORAL ORDER (Per B.R.Gavai,J.) 1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing Review Application. The 2 application is vehemently opposed by Mr.Patil, on the ground that there is inordinate delay in filing Review Application. 2. However, in peculiar facts of the case, particularly that the caste validity Certificate of the petitioner and his brother has been validated, we allow the application for condonation of delay. 3. Review Petition St.No.16309/2010 is taken on Board. 4. Mr.Awate, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that an error apparent on the face of record has occurred in the judgment and order dated 7.1.2010, while dismissing the Writ Petition. Mr.Awate, further submits that subsequent to the rejection of the petition filed by the present petitioner, the claim of the petitioner's real sister Ayesha has been validated vide order dt.1.4.2009 and subsequently claim of two brothers of the petitioner namely Sameer and Naseer has also 3 been validated as Scheduled Tribe. He submits that this fact could not be brought to the notice of the Court inasmuch as the said documents could not have been available at that time. He, therefore, submits that the judgment and order under Review is liable to be recalled. 5. Mr.Patil, learned counsel vehemently submits that merely because the validity is granted in favour of the petitioner's sister on an erroneous reasoning, the petitioner would not be ipso facto entitled to be declared as Scheduled Tribe. 6. We have perused the material on record. It appears that the claim of the petitioner's sister Ayesha was scrutinised by the Vigilance cell. The Vigilance Cell has also noticed the fact regarding rejection of the petitioner's claim. After considering all these aspects the claim of the petitioner's sister Ayesha has been held to be valid. We find that anomalous situation that one sister and two brothers belong to Scheduled Tribe and one brother does not 4 belong to Scheduled Tribe can not be permitted to exist. Since the orders of validity granted in favour of petitioner's sister and brother are passed subsequently, the same could not have been produced when the petition came to be dismissed. In that view of the matter, good ground for review is made out. The application is, therefore, allowed. The order dated 7.1.2002, passed by this Court is recalled. The Writ Petition is directed to be posted for admission before the appropriate Bench. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (B.R.GAVAI,J.) asp/office/Ca859010