1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY : AURANGABAD BENCH REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 98 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2711 OF 2008 Sau. Archana Jitendra Pawar- - Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and others. - - Respondents Shri D. B. Thoke Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Shri S. K. Tambe, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for Respondents Nos.1, 4, 7 and 9. Shri B. S. Mundhe, Advocate for Respondents Nos. 5 and 6. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. Dated : 17th July 2009 ORAL ORDER [ Per NARESH H. PATIL, J. ] 1. Learned Counsel raised two issues in his submissions. One is that inquiry in respect of the Tahsildar issuing caste certificate ought to have been conducted by the Committee and second is that Vigilance Cell Report was not called. 2 The Counsel placed reliance on an Order of the Apex Court dated 20-7-2001 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.4409-4410 of 2001(arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 17393-17394 of 2000) in the Case of Vasant Pandurang Narwade @ Marvde vs. Suhash and others and a judgment reported in 2003(3) Mh.L.J. 612 in the case of Annaji Maroti Raut vs. Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe, Vimukta Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Class and Special Backward Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Nagpur and others. We have perused these judgments. We do not find good and sufficient ground to entertain the petition. Petition is dismissed. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) ( NARESH H. PATIL, J. ) pnk/ra9809