(1) WP. 1226.2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1226 OF 2007 Sanjay S/o Gyanoba Walkale PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. A.S. Bayas, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Addl. G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. R.P. Phatke, Advocate for the respondent no.2 Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for the respondent no.3 Respondent no.6 deleted as per Courts Court dt.7.6.2011 None present for other respondents though served ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 21ST JUNE, 2011 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The main grievance of the petitioner in the present Petition is that the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad has incorrectly recorded the fact that the petitioner was heard by it before the impugned order was passed. The petitioner maintained that no notice at all was served on him for remaining present on 21.12.2006. According to the petitioner, the notice directing him (2) WP. 1226.2007 to remain present was received by him on 27.12.2006. Another notice which was received by him on the same day includes the report of the Vigilance Cell. 2. Since the Scrutiny Committee had recorded that the petitioner had appeared on 21.12.2006 before it, we directed Mr. Phatke, learned Advocate appearing for the Committee to produce the original record. 3. Mr. Phatke very fairly concedes that the Scrutiny Committee has incorrectly recorded the aforesaid statement. He points out that both the notices i.e. one forwarding the Vigilance Cell report and the other directing the petitioner to be present before it on 21.12.2006 were in fact dispatched on 7.12.2006. However, he agrees that there is nothing on record to indicate that sufficient notice of 15 days was given to the petitioner, so as to be present on 21.12.2006 before the Committee. 4. In these circumstances, we set aside the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee and remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for hearing it (3) WP. 1226.2007 afresh. Indisputably, the petitioner has already received a copy of the Vigilance Cell report. 5. The petitioner shall be present before the Committee on 4th July, 2011 at 11.00 am. for further directions. The Scrutiny Committee may pass orders in accordance with law while considering the tribe claim of the petitioner. Petition disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] arp