{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6954 OF 2009 Apparao s/o Shivaji Punjarwad Minor, Through power of attorney holder Umesh s/o Shivaji Punjarwad Age-19, Years, Occ-Education R/o At-Kharatwadi, Post-Digras Tq-Hadgaon, Dist-Nanded PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad Through its Deputy Director (R) 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat Dist-Nanded 4. The Collector, Nanded Dist-Nanded RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.S.M.Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner Mr.S.V.Kurundkar, Addl.G.P. for respondents No.1, 3 and 4 Mr.U.S.Malte, Advocate for respondent No.2 ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] {2} DATE: 15th October 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.V.POTDAR, 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. 2. By the present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of directions to respondent No.3 to issue caste certificate to the petitioner to the effect that he belongs to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe, as per order dated 27.02.2009 passed by the Scrutiny Committee by quashing of the order dated 09.07.2009 passed by respondent No.3, Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of directions to respondent No.4 to initiate Departmental Inquiry against the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat for causing unnecessary harassment to the petitioner by not issuing the tribe certificate as directed by the appellate authority. 3. The facts which gave rise to file the present petition can be summarized thus - The petitioner, on 06.07.2008, had submitted an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat seeking caste certificate claiming to be belonging to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe. Along {3} with the said application the petitioner had also furnished caste validity certificate issued to the cousin of his father so also caste certificate issued to the cousin of the petitioner. It appears that vide order dated 25.09.2008, the Sub Divisional Officer rejected the application of the petitioner. It further appears that the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer came to be challenged by the petitioner, by filing appeal No.714/2008 before the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. It also appears that the Scrutiny Committee, vide its judgment and order dated 27.02.2009, allowed the said appeal and set aside the order of the Sub Divisional Officer. It further appears that on the basis of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee the petitioner moved an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat seeking caste certificate. However, the Sub Divisional Officer, vide order dated 19.06.2009, directed the petitioner to produce additional evidence, if the petitioner so desired. The Sub Divisional Officer has further directed the petitioner that in case the petitioner failed to produce additional evidence, his application will be disposed of. It appears that thereafter, the petitioner produced caste validity certificate issued to the real cousin of the petitioner and also the caste certificate issued to his uncle. However, the Sub Divisional Officer, vide order dated 09.07.2009, rejected the application submitted by the petitioner. Hence, the present petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. {4} 5. During the course of submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention towards the fact that though the appeal filed by the petitioner came to be allowed by the Scrutiny Committee, yet the Sub Divisional Officer refused to issue caste certificate to the petitioner. Thus, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the Sub Divisional Officer has no authority to overrule the order passed by the appellate authority i.e. Scrutiny Committee. Our attention is also invited towards the fact that one Devidas Suryabhan Punjarwad, who happens to be the second cousin of the petitioner, had also filed an appeal before the Scrutiny Committee, which came to be allowed on 27.02.2009 and on that basis the same the Sub Divisional Officer has issued caste certificate to the said Devidas Suryabhan on 24.08.2009. The petitioner has annexed the affidavit of said Devidas to show the interse relationship between petitioner and the said Devidas to whom caste certificate is issued by the same Sub Divisional Officer. Along with the said affidavit the caste certificate holder has also given the genealogy, which indicates that the present petitioner and the deponent / caste certificate holder are real cousins. Learned AGP appearing for the Sub Divisional Officer is unable to support the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, not only on the legal aspects but also on the logical aspects. In the premise, considering attitude of the Sub Divisional Officer, we are inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, we allow this petition. We hereby quash and set aside the order dated 09.07.2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and direct the Sub Divisional Officer, {5} Kinwat to issue caste certificate in favour of the petitioner to the effect that the petitioner belongs to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe, forthwith. 6. Needless to state that the caste certificate to be issued will be subject to verification by the competent scrutiny committee. 7. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. 8. Before parting with this judgment we deem it appropriate to state that we have taken a note of the fact that repeatedly we are coming across with the orders of the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat wherein inspite of the appeals being allowed by the appellate authority against the orders of the Sub Divisional Officer, the Sub Divisional Officer is refusing to issue caste certificates to the concerned applicants, which causes inconvenience and harassment to the applicants. We expect that the Department may take note of this attitude of the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat and may initiate appropriate action against the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/wp6954-09