1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3038 OF 2010 Sandip Ramrao Manjarme } Age : 22 Years, Occ. : Service, } Presently working as Parichar, } R/o : D-50, Champak Building, } S.T. Quarter, Samarth Nagar, } Aurangabad. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. } 2. The Committee for Scrutiny } and verification of Tribe Claims, } Aurangabad } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. K.U.More, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. U.B.Bondar, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. P.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent no. 2. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 06/04/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER – P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2 2. We have heard Mr. K.U.More, Advocate for petitioner, Mr. U.B.Bondar, Advocate for respondent no. 1 and Mr. P.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent no. 2. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the communication dated 29/3/2010 issued by respondent no. 1 directing the petitioner to submit his caste validity certificate within 7 days failing which, adverse action would be initiated against the petitioner. 4. Undisputedly, the petitioner is an employee of the Zilla Parishad, Auarangabad and had submitted his Certificate for verification before the Scrutiny Committee. Undisputedly also the said claim is pending before the respondent – Scrutiny Committee. During the pendency of the aforesaid claim, respondent no. 1 has issued the impugned communication intimating the petitioner to submit validity certificate within 7 days, failing which adverse action would follow. Obviously, the petitioner is not responsible for the delay which has arisen in the decision of his caste claim. 5. In that light of the matter, therefore, according to us, this petition deserve to be allowed. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned 3 communication is hereby quashed and set aside and the respondent no. 1 is directed not to initiate any adverse action against the petitioner till his claim is decided by the Scrutiny Committee. We accordingly direct the petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 26/4/2010 and direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within six months from 26/4/2010. 7. Rule is thus made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 3038.10 ( J )