1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5529 OF 2010 Sandip Shankarrao Paidiwar, Age 22 years, Occu.Education, R/o Bhoi Galli, Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary 2. Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Taluka Degloor, District Nanded ..RESPONDENTS Mr.S.S.Phatale, Advocate holding for Mr.M.S.Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondent No.2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 24th June 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. We have heard Mr.Phatale, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, Mr.P.S.Patil, learned Counsel on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mrs.Gondhalekar, learned Assistant Govt.Pleader on behalf of respondent No.2. 2 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner takes exception to the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer dated 29.12.2008 rejecting the application of the petitioner for issuance of a caste certificate as belonging to Mannerwarlu – Scheduled Tribe. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the said decision came to be dismissed by the scrutiny committee by its judgment dated 31.3.2009. 3. In this petition, the petitioner has annexed a caste certificate issued to the real uncle of the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the said uncle is an uncle from the paternal side but unfortunately, his caste certificate has not been produced before the Sub Divisional Officer. In that light of the matter, therefore, according to us another opportunity deserves to be given to the petitioner for producing the aforesaid certificate before the Sub Divisional Officer and after its production, it is necessary for the Sub Divisional Officer to evaluate the evidentiary value of the aforesaid certificate. 4. In that light of the matter, therefore, we allow this petition and quash and set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor for a decision afresh, in accordance with law. The petitioner to produce documents in his possession within four weeks from today. The 3 Sub Divisional Officer to thereafter decide the application of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law, within eight weeks. 5. Rule made absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/5529.10wp)