1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4018 of 2000 SHRIKANT S/O. CHINAYYA PATWEKAR Age 17 year – minor, occ. Student THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN Mr. Chinanna s/o. Narsimalu Patwekar Age 46 years, Occ. Services r/o. c/o. Branch anager, S.B.I. Waghalwada, Dist. Nanded. Petitioner Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee Nasik. 3] The Sub Divisional Magistrate Degloor 4] Respondent NO.4 The Competent Authority for Admission to P.G. Course in Ayurved for the year 2006 viz the Director of Ayurved Maharashtra State, Mumbai. 5] The Designated Authority for Admission to P.G. Course in Ayurved for the year 2006 viz the Dean R.N. Podar [Ayurved] Medical College Worli Mumbai-18. 2 6] The State of Maharashtra through the Under Secretary Public Health Department, Mantralaya, Mumai 32. Respondents Mr. A.S.Golegaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. N.B. Patil, AGP for the respondent Mr. P.S. Patil, Advocate for the respondent No.2. With WRIT PETITION NO. 4030 OF 2000 SURESH S/O. RADHAKISHAN PATWEKAR Age minor, Occ. Student through his father & guardian Mr. Radhakishan s/o. Narsimalu Patwekar, age 44 year, , Occ. Service working as Civil Engineer PWD, at Degloor, r/o. At & post Kundalwadi, taluka Biloli District Nanded. .. Petitioner Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee Nasik. 3] The Sub Divisional Magistrate Degloor Mr. A.S.Golegaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. N.B. Patil, AGP for the respondent Mr. P.S. Patil, Advocate for the respondent No.2. 3 CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA,JJ. DATE : 29TH July, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER B.R. GAVAI, J] : 1] By way of present petition, the petitioners have approached this court, challeing the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, thereby invalidating the claim of the petitioners. 2] Shri Golegaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order of the Scrutiny committee is bad in law inasmuch as, the claim of the father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 4030 of 2000, namely, Shri Radhakishan Patwekar, as belonging to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe has been held to be valid, by order of the Scrutiny Committee dated 26th August, 2008. 3] Shri Patil learned counsel appearing for the committee submits that claim of Radhakishan was validated since he had suppressed the fact regarding invalidation of the claim of his son Suresh, in W.P. No. 4030/2000. 4] In these peculiar circumstances, we had asked the learned counsel for the petitioner to seek instructions from the said Shri Radhakishan, as to whether he is willing to get his claim also re- examined by the Committee. According Shri Radhakishan Narsimlu Patwekar has filed an affidavit on record. The said affidavit is taken on record and marked “X” for the purpose of identification. In that view of the matter, we quash and set aside the orders impugned in W.P. No. 4018/2000 and 4030/2000. 4 5] Since Shri Radhakishan Patwekar has himself filed an affidavit that he is willing to get the claim re-examined by the Scrutiny Committee, the order of the Scrutiny Committee validating the tribe claim of Shri Radhakishan Patwekar dated 26th August, 2008, is also quashed and set aside. 6] The Committed is directed to re-examine the claim of the petitioners in W.P. No. 4018 of 2000 and 4030 of 2000, alongwith the claim of Shri Radhakishan Narsimlu Patwekar, in accordance with law. The petitioners alongwith their father Shri Radhakishan Patwekar to appear before the Committee on 23rd August, 2010 and the committee to decide the claims within a period of one year from the date of appearance. Shri Radhakishan Patwekar to submit the original validity certificate before the committee, which was granted to him. . Rule made absolute in above terms with no orders as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp