1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5278 OF 2010 Bhushan s/o Mohan Thakur Age 21 years, Occ. Student, R/o Aurangabad, District Aurangabad ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar. 3. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, through its Deputy Registrar. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri S.R. Barlinge, Advocate for the petitioner Shri S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent No.2 Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, Advocate for respondent No.3 ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 21st July, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER HARDAS, J.): 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of 2 learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for quashing and setting aside the communication issued by the respondent University dated 5.5.2010 and also prays for directing the respondent Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within a stipulated period. 3. During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner had appeared before the respondent Scrutiny Committee and personal hearing was granted to the petitioner and the proceedings are now closed for passing the necessary orders. In that light of the matter, therefore, no specific directions are required to be issued to the respondent Scrutiny Committee for deciding the claim of the petitioner within any particular period. However, by virtue of the impugned communication dated 5.5.2010, the petitioner was not permitted to appear for the examination and it was intimated to the petitioner that his admission would be treated as a candidate from open category, thus requiring the petitioner to shoulder the burden of paying additional fees which are meant to be paid by candidates belonging to open category. Mr. Barlinge, learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the petitioner was ultimately permitted to appear for the examination and has appeared, but the result of the petitioner is 3 withheld. 4. In that light of the matter, therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition. We, therefore, allow this petition to the extent of directing that the payment of fees made by the petitioner pursuant to the communication dated 5.5.2010 would be subject to the decision of the proceedings pending before the respondent Scrutiny Committee. We expect the Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously decide the pending proceedings and direct the respondent University to declare the result of the petitioner forthwith. The declaration of the result obviously would be subject to the order/ judgment of the Scrutiny Committee in the pending proceedings for verification of the caste/ tribe status of the petitioner. 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)