1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.911 of 2009 (Anil Ashokrao Hade and others v. State of Maharashtra and others) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Coram : D.D. Sinha & A.P. Bhangale, JJ. Dated : 10 th July, 2009 Heard Shri P.S. Khubalkar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri A.S. Fulzele, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Shri A.S. Kilor, learned counsel for respondent No.3. The counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner Nos.1 and 4 are working as Assistant Teachers in respondent No.3-School. So far as respondent Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, the petitioners do not want to press the petition on their behalf, since their caste 2 claims are already decided by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioner Nos.1 and 4 were appointed from the reserved category and their caste certificates were forwarded to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification, which are pending for decision. It is contended that direction be given to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claims of petitioner Nos.1 and 4 within a stipulated period and further prayed that till such time, the services of petitioner Nos.1 and 4 may kindly be protected. The learned AGP for the Caste Scrutiny Committee states that the caste claims of petitioner Nos.1 and 4 would be decided as per the directions of this Court. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claims 3 of petitioner Nos.1 and 4 on their own merit in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard, provided there is no other legal impediment in doing so, as early as possible and in any case not beyond the period of one month from the date of communication of this order, since it is brought to the notice of this Court that the proceedings are already closed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee for orders. In the meantime, the services of petitioner Nos.1 and 4 need not be disturbed, and the same would be subject to the result of the decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Judge Judge pdl