- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2987/2010 Sadashiv Sukhdeo Sable & another. ...Petitioners.. Versus The State of Maharashtra & seven others. ...Respondents... ..... Shri V.C. Patil, Advocate h/f Shri V.D. Patnoorkar, Advocate for petitioners. Shri D.R. Kale, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4. Shri S.C. Yeramwar, Advocate for respondent nos.5 to 8. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE: 01.10.2010 PER COURT : 1] This is a frivolous public interest litigation, which the petitioner has filed. The petitioner has challenged the certificates issued to the respondent nos.5 to 8 by the Sub Divisional Officer. By this petition, the petitioner prays for issuance of writ directing the respondent nos.1 & 2 to conduct an inquiry in respect of the caste certificate issued to the respondent no.5 as well as in respect of applications submitted by the respondent nos.6 to 8 for obtaining the caste certificate from the - 2 - respondent no.4. 2] According to the petitioner, the respondent no.5 has practised fraud in obtaining the certificate from the Sub Divisional Officer. It appears that the certificate issued to the respondent no.5 by the Sub Divisional Officer was referred to the scrutiny committee for verification and the scrutiny committee, by its order dated 22.3.2007, has granted validity certificate to the respondent no.5. The aforesaid validity is not subject of challenge in the present writ petition. The respondent nos.6, 7 & 8 have applied for issuance of caste certificates to them and the Sub Divisional Officer has as yet not passed any orders granting certificates to the respondent nos.6, 7 & 8. Since the matter is pending before the Sub Divisional Officer and as per the statement of the petitioner, no caste certificates have been granted by the Sub Divisional Officer to the respondent nos.6, 7 & 8, present petition is wholly premature. In that light of the matter, the reliefs, which the petitioner has sought for at prayer clauses (A) & (B) can not be granted. The petitioner has prayed for directing the respondent no.2 to decide the representation submitted the petitioner. The aforesaid representation has been rendered infructruous in the light of the fact that the validity certificate has been granted to the respondent no.5. 3] We, therefore, see no merit whatsoever in the present petition and accordingly dismiss the petition as such. The petitioner, pursuant to orders of this Court, has deposited an amount of Rs.20,000/- in this Court. We dismissi the - 3 - petition granting costs to the respondent nos.5 to 8 and quantify the same at Rs. 5,000/-. Cost of Rs.5,000/- be paid to the respondent nos.5, 6, 7 and 8 from out of the amount of Rs.20,000/- deposited by the petitioner. The petitioner would be entitled to refund of Rs.15,000/-. (A.V. Potdar, J.) (P.V. Hardas, J.) ndk/c1101011