1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.3026/2011 ( Ku. Sandhya Gulabrao Sonkusare ..V/s.. The chief Executive Officer and others ) ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Mr. A.B. Patil, Adv. for petitioner. Mr. J.B. Kasat, Adv. for respondent nos.1 and 4. Mr. A.P. Kalmegh, Adv. h/f Mr. N.W. Sambre, Adv. for respondent no.5. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE AND M.N. GILANI, JJ. DATE : 22.09.2011. Heard. The services of the petitioner, who was working as a Shikshan Sevak, came to be terminated vide order 7/2/2011 because she has not produced a validity certificate. It is submitted that her caste claim is pending with the respondent no.5 and the same is not yet decided. In this regard, learned counsel for the respondent no.5 states that the caste claim of the petitioner has not yet been decided and the same will be decided within a period of four months by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. In view of above submissions, the respondent no.5 – Caste Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the caste claim of the petitioner (if not decided) within a period of four months from the date the petitioner appears before the Caste Scrutiny Committee. 2 The petitioner is directed to appear before the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 10/10/2011. The Caste Scrutiny Committee shall thereafter decide the caste claim of the petitioner in accordance with law. Since the services of the petitioner were terminated only for non-production of a caste validity certificate and since such a decision by the Case Scrutiny Committee is beyond control of the petitioner, we set aside the termination order dated 7/2/2011 issued by the respondent no.1 and respondent no.1 – the Chief Officer Zilla Parishad, Amravati is directed to reinstate the petitioner back to service. However, the services of the petitioner shall be subject to the outcome of the caste scrutiny proceedings. With these observations, writ petition is partly allowed. JUDGE JUDGE Tambaskar.