1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4756 OF 2009 (Suchit A. Barapatre vs. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri N.C. Phadnis, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. T.D. Khade, Advocate for the respondent no.1. Shri Thakre, Advocate holding for Shri N.W. Sambre, Advocate for the respondent no.3. ------ CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND P.B.VARALE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 11, 2010 Shri Phadnis, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that in view of subsequent order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, this petition has become infructuous. The petition is disposed of as infructuous. This Court on 21/1/2010 had issued notice to the following persons to show cause why action of contempt should not be initiated against them : 2 (1) Smt. Vasudha Prabhakar Naik, then Sr. Research Officer (now Deputy Director), Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim, Adivasi Bhavan, 2 nd Floor, Giripeth, Nagpur. (2) Shri M.P. Maske, then Deputy Director, r/o Onkar Nagar, Ring Road, Nagpur and (3) Shri V.S. Patil, Joint Commissioner, Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim, Adivasi Bhavan, 2 nd Floor, Giripeth, Nagpur.” It appears that this Court had directed the Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of the order dated 21.3.2006. Despite such direction, the Caste Scrutiny Committee did not decide the caste claim of the petitioner and hence, the show cause notice was issued. In response to the notice, Smt. Vasudha Prabhakar Naik, Deputy Director, Deputy Director, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur has filed a detailed affidavit stating therein as to why the Caste Scrutiny Committee could not decide the caste claim of the petitioner within the time stipulated by the 3 order dated 21.3.2006. She has also tendered unconditional apology for failing to comply with the order dated 21.3.2006. Keeping that in view and considering the explanation offered by her in the affidavit, we are inclined to discharge the notice. Order accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE khj