1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4145 OF 2005 (Prashant Pandurang Donge vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & F.M. REIS, JJ. AUGUST 26, 2009. Heard finally Shri Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Mirza, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Sambre, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Mishra, learned counsel expressed the difficulty in assisting the Court fully by pointing out that he has returned the papers for enabling the petitioner to engage another advocate before Full Bench at Mumbai. However, with the help of the Court file and file of Respondent No.2, he has argued the matter. He points out that the impugned order is dated 17.2.2005 and though no document showing any other tribe is found, the claim is invalidated only by applying the affinity test and by labeling the knowledge of the petitioner as bookish knowledge. He contends that thus, there is failure to apply mind. He, however, steps that the petitioner did not lead any evidence to prove affinity because at the relevant time, the view 2 expressed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ravi Prakash Babulalsing Parmar vs. State of Maharashtra, reported at 2004 (1) Mh.L.J. 177, was holding the field. He states that subsequently said view has been upset by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the State of Maharashtra vs. Ravi Prakash Parmar, reported at 2007 (2) Mh.L.J. 250. He, therefore, prays that opportunity needs to be given to the petitioner to lead evidence to prove affinity test by leading positive evidence. Shri Sambre, learned counsel and Shri Mirza, learned AGP for respective respondents are opposing the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, as the developments in the field of law are not in dispute, we grant opportunity to he petitioner as prayed for to lead positive evidence to prove affinity. For that purpose, impugned order dated 17.2.2005 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is restored back to file of Caste Scrutiny Committee for taking fresh decision as early as possible and in any case by 30th June 2010. The petitioner shall appear before the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 29th September 2009 and shall abide by its further directions in the matter. In the circumstances, the present writ petition is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.