1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6823 OF 1998 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.968 OF 2008 Smt.Varsha Gangadhar Kulkarni ...Petitioner Versus Sangli Education Society & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Sunil Dighe for Petitioner. Mr.G.H.Keluskar for Respondent No.1. Mr.R.K.Mendadkar for Respondent No.2. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondents 3 to 6. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATED:- APRIL 1, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. The only relief claimed in this Petition is to issue direction to Respondents 1, 6 and 7 to scrutinize the caste claim of the Respondent No.2 of his allegedly belonging to backward class/ST category and also his date of birth, which according to him is 1st June 1948. 2 3. It is not in dispute that during the pendency of this Petition, Respondent No.2 has attained the age of superannuation. During the pendency of this Petition, Respondent No.2 retired on 31st May 2006. Whereas, the Petitioner had already retired prior to filing of the Petition. It is true that the Respondent No.2 got benefit on the basis of his claim of belonging to reserve category while in service. 4. The question is: whether at this distance of time, we should exercise our writ jurisdiction? We decline to do so for more than one reason. Firstly, both the parties have already retired from service long back. Secondly, it is noticed from the reply filed by the Respondent No.2 that he got benefit as belonging to reserve category on the basis of School Leaving Certificate dated 31st May 1964 which mentions his caste and sub-caste as Hindu-Koli (Malhar). The Respondent No.2 is now relying on the duplicate copy of the School Leaving Certificate which has been issued to him on 12th February 1982. Xerox copy thereof which has been attested by the Head Master of the School was also produced before us. Copy whereof is already marked as Exhibit A to the reply affidavit at Page 86. We have also noticed that as per the dispensation provided at the relevant time, the person claiming such benefit could legitimately rely on Matriculation School Leaving Certificate 3 or the Birth Certificate indicating the caste or community of the candidate and place of residence and a Certificate in the form given in Appendix 14 issued by one of the authorities listed in Appendix 15. On the basis of such Certificate, provisional appointment could be given to such person as belonging to reserve category. In case the appointing authority so desire, could have got the claim of that candidate verified through the District Magistrate. In the present case, the Respondent No.2 secured the benefit as reserve category in the year 1981 when he was promoted as Head Master. The appointing authority of the Respondent No.2 did not get the claim verified from the District Magistrate at that time as obviously it did not have any doubt about the genuineness of the certificate so produced by the Respondent No.2. This arrangement is spelt out in Chapter 13 Brochure on reservation of SC/ST in service published by Government of India, copy whereof is at page 92. 5. Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, we do not think it necessary to precipitate the matter any further. Even though Counsel for the Petitioner was at pains to persuade us that a person who has taken wrongful benefit of his false claim of belonging to reserve category, inquiry into his claim by the Competent Authority would be essential. 4 6. For the reasons already noted, we dispose of this Petition while making it clear that this decision is not an expression of opinion about the correctness of the caste claim of the Respondent No.2 or any person claiming through Respondent No.2. 7. Petition disposed of accordingly. 8. In view of the above order, nothing survives in the companion Application. The same is also disposed of. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)