1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8225 OF 2010 Shankar S/o Chandrahas Nalmale Age 19 years, Occ-Education R/o Village Yelnur, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur. .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra Through the Principal Secretary Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032. 2] The Principal Secretary to Government, Higher & Technical Education Department Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032 3] The Joint Commissioner and Vice President, Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. 4] The Principal M.S.Bidve Engineering College P.O.No.112, Barshi Road,Latur 5] Swami Ramanand Teerth 2 University Nanded, through its Registrar. [Respondents Nos.1 to 3 to be served through Government Pleader, High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad] .. RESPONDENTS .... Shri V.T.Sakolkar,Advocate for the petitioner. Shri S.K.Tambe,AGP for the respondents 1 & 2. Shri Phatake,Addl.Std.Counsel for Respondent n.3 Shri R.V.Ghuge,Adv.for Respondent no.5 .... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI & A.A.SAYED,JJ. DATE : 27TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [PER GAVAI,J.] : 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard counsel for respective parties. By consent of parties, Petition is heard finally at admission stage. 2] The limited grievance of the petitioner is that though 3 claim of the petitioner for verification of his claim of belonging to Koli Mahadev (Scheduled Tribe) is pending with the Committee, the same is not being decided and on account of the same not being decided, his result of first year Engineering Course has not been declared by respondents no. 4 and 5. 2] The learned A.G.P. appears for respondents 1 and 2 ,Shri Phatake appears for respondent no.3 and Shri Ghuge appears for respondent no.5. Though respondent no.4 is served and an affidavit in support of the service upon him is filed, none appears for him. 3] The petitioner cannot be penalised for the delay on the part of respondent no.3 in deciding tribal claim of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, we dispose of the petition in the following terms : 4 4] The respondent no.3 shall decide claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of one year from today. The petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 11 th October 2010 and as such requirement of formal notice shall stand waived. 5] Respondents 2,4 and 5 are directed to declare result of the petitioner of his examination to First year of Engineering Course. In the event, the petitioner successfully clears the said examination, he shall be permitted to the second year Engineering course. 6] Admission of the petitioner shall not be cancelled till the decision of the scrutiny committee and in the event, decision is adverse to the interest of the petitioner, within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of communication of the same by the petitioner, on the ground of non submitting validity certificate. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No 5 order as to costs. Authenticated copy is allowed. (A.A.SAYED) (B.R.GAVAI) JUDGE JUDGE ... umg/wp8225-10