wp3036.10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3036 OF 2010 Mrs. Sushila w/o Shantaram Patil, Age-53 years, Occu:Household, R/o-Bhadgaon, Tq-Bhadgaon, Dist-Jalgaon. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar, Dist-Nandurbar, 3) Bebabai Yashwant Borse alias Malache, Age-43 years, Occu:Household, R/o-Ward No.1, Bhadgaon, Tq-Bhadgaon, Dist-Jalgaon, 4) The Sub-Divisional Officer, Pachora, Dist-Jalgaon. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri. S.B. Talekar Advocate for Petitioner. Shri. V.D. Godbharle, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 4. Shri. R.P. Phatake, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Shri. D.B. Thoke Advocate for Respondent No.3. ... wp3036.10 2 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATE : 9TH DECEMBER, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.] : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 2. The Petitioner contends that the Respondent No.3 claims to be belonging to "Bhil", a Scheduled Tribe. The Respondent No.3 obtained caste certificate on 22nd January, 2010, issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pachora, Dist-Jalgaon. The Petitioner contested election to the Municipal Council, Bhadgaon, Dist-Jalgaon, against Respondent No.3. The Respondent No.3 got elected as Councillor by defeating the Petitioner. By an order dated 27th January, 2010 the Caste Scrutiny Committee verified the caste claim of the wp3036.10 3 Respondent No.3 and issued validity certificate in favour of Respondent No.3. The Petitioner, who contested the election against Respondent No.3, challenged the said order of Caste Scrutiny Committee. 3. Shri. Talekar, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee is erroneous as proper enquiry has not been conducted. Before issuing the validity certificate, Vigilance Cell Enquiry was not conducted. The Caste Scrutiny Committee ought to have looked into the available evidence placed on record and after appreciating the same would have passed order in accordance with law. The learned counsel further submits that within five days the Caste Scrutiny Committee issued validity certificate in favour of Respondent No.3, which, according to the counsel, is done with undue haste. wp3036.10 4 4. Shri. Thoke, learned counsel for Respondent No.3 - elected candidate, submits that the evidence available before the Caste Scrutiny Committee was sufficient to grant certificate of validity in favour of Respondent No.3. The Respondent No.3 could have placed on record some more documents before the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Respondent No.3 submits that she belongs to "Bhil" community and accordingly she contested the election and elected. As the Petitioner lost the election, therefore the Petitioner is raising objection. 5. Shri. Phatake, learned counsel appearing for the Caste Scrutiny Committee, placed original record before us. We have perused the same. Shri. Phatake, submits that apart from the record which is placed before the Court, the Caste Scrutiny Committee did not have any other material for its consideration. wp3036.10 5 6. From the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the record placed before us, we find that some deeper enquiry is required to be done by the Caste Scrutiny Committee to ascertain whether Respondent No.3 belongs to "Bhil", Scheduled Tribe. It is to be borne in mind that Respondent No.3 was claiming to be belonging to reserved category of Scheduled Tribe and therefore abundant caution and care was required to be taken. Without entering into the merits of the matter, we observe that fresh opportunity is required to be given to the contesting parties for placing more evidence on record, if available. The Caste Scrutiny Committee shall also contemplate to conduct Vigilance Cell Enquiry in this matter. We therefore, find that the matter requires to be remanded back. 7. The caste validity certificate dated 27th January, 2010 issued by the Caste Scrutiny Committee in favour of Respondent No.3 is quashed wp3036.10 6 and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Petitioner and Respondent No.3 are directed to appear before the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 20th December, 2010 at 11.00 a.m. The Caste Scrutiny Committee shall decide caste claim of Respondent No.3 within THREE MONTHS from the date of appearance of the parties before it. The parties to co-operate with the Caste Scrutiny Committee in disposal of the caste claim. Needless to mention that the Caste Scrutiny Committee would pass reasoned order, after considering the material placed before it. All issues are kept open. It is made clear that we have not expressed anything on merits of the matter. . Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above. [SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/DEC10/wp3036.07