1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4532 OF 2008 Jitendra Vasudeo Kadhikhaye, Age : 31 Years, Occu. : Gram Sevak, Panchayat Samiti, Muktainagar, C/o 8/B, Kamgar Nagar, Kurla (E), Mumbai. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Schedule Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Nagpur Division, through its Member Secretary having its office at Adivashi Bhavan, Nagpur. 3. Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, through its Chief Executive Officer. .. .. Respondents Shri A. S. Bayas, Advocate h/f Shri R. K. Mendadkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri D. R. Korde, A. G. P. for the Respondents No. 1. Shri R. P. Phatake, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. Shri M. S. Sonawane Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3. CORAM : A. P. DESHPANDE & N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 17TH FEBRUARY, 2010. 2 JUDGMENT [ PER A. P. DESHPANDE, J. ] : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for final hearing by consent of both the parties. 2. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Dhoba Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner came to be employed under the Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon as Gram Sevak. The petitioner was appointed against a vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe category. The petitioner had joined his service on 29.08.1996. As yet the tribe claim of the petitioner has not been verified by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. It is undisputed that the caste claim of the petitioner is pending before the Caste Scrutiny Committee Gadchiroli. Learned counsel appearing for the Committee makes statement that the petitioner's case is now fixed on 23rd February, 2010 for hearing. It is also stated that the petitioner failed to appear before the Committee on last date when the matter was listed for hearing i. e. on 25.09.2009. 3. The petitioner is present in the Court and informed of the next date by the counsel. The petitioner approached this Court by making a grievance that on one hand the Scrutiny Committee is not deciding the caste claim expeditiously, and on the other hand, the employer Zilla Parishad is proposing to take a coercive action 3 against the petitioner for his failure to submit the caste validity. In this factual background the interim relief came to be granted to the petitioner which is continued till today. 4. We have no iota of doubt that as the petitioner is working since 1996 till date, he need to be protected till his caste claim is decided by the Caste Scrutiny Committee at Gadchiroli and the said course would be in furtherance of cause of justice. 5. On an inquiry being made as to whether the petitioner has been served with copy of the Vigilance Cell report or otherwise, the petitioner who is present in the Court informed that copy of the Vigilance Cell report is not served on him. In that view of the matter, we direct the respondent No. 2/Committee to serve copy of the Vigilance Cell Report to the petitioner on 23rd February, 2010, when the matter is fixed for hearing and shall further grant reasonable time to the petitioner to file his objection/reply to the Vigilance Cell report and, thereafter, fix the matter for final hearing. 6. We hope and trust that the Scrutiny Committee would dispose of the matter expeditiously after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of being heard in the matter. We expect the Committee to take final decision within a period of six 4 months from today. Interim order passed by this Court protecting the petitioner from the coercive action at the hands of Zilla Parishad/Respondent No. 3 to continue till decision of the caste claim of the petitioner by the Scrutiny Committee. Rule is made absolute in above terms. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ A. P. DESHPANDE, J.] bsb/Feb. 2010