1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5251 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and the Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Coram: Smt. Nishita Mhatre, & Shri M. T. Joshi, JJ. Date : 26th July, 2011 Shri S.M. Vibhute, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri V. B. Ghatge, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 & 2. Shri N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for Respondent No.3. --------- 1. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The petition has been preferred by a person who claims to be belonging to the Malhar Koli, Scheduled Tribe. He contends that the scrutiny committee has rejected his tribe claim and invalidated the certificate issued to him by the Executive Magistrate. 2 3. The main contentions of the learned Advocate for the petitioner are that:- (i) Although the vigilance cell report indicates that the petitioner has an affinity for the Malhar Koli Scheduled Tribe, the scrutiny committee has held that neither the petitioner nor his family have the basic knowledge of the traits, characteristics, culture, etc. of the Malhar Koli Scheduled Tribe. (ii) The paternal uncle's school record shows that he belongs to the Malhar Koli Scheduled Tribe. 4. In our opinion, the criticism levelled by the learned Advocate is sustainable with respect to the first issue, namely, that the committee has not discussed its reasons as to why it differed with the vigilance cell report. 3 4. In these circumstances, the matter is remanded to the Scrutiny committee to decide the petitioner's tribe claim, afresh. The petitioner shall appear before the committee on 22.8.2011. 6. We have been informed that the petitioner has already been compulsorily retired from service for an act of misconduct, and not for the reason that he had no valid caste certificate. 7. Petition is allowed, accordingly. Rule made absolute, accordingly. (M.T. JOSHI, J) (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) pnd/wp5251.10