(1) wp2865-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2865 OF 2011 Mahesh Rameshwar Swami PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate holding for Mr. M.C. Swami, advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. ..... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 6th SEPTEMBER, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. Leave to amend. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent. 3. The petitioner impugns the order dated 9th March, 2011 passed by the respondent No. 2 Committee, thereby invalidating the claim of the petitioner of belonging to `Beda-Jangam' which is recognized as Scheduled Caste. 4. The order is assailed on the following (2) wp2865-11 grounds : (i) That, though as many as 55 documents including the validity certificates issued in favour of cousins of the petitioner's father were produced before the Committee, the same have not been considered; (ii) Though the report of the Vigilance Cell was in favour of the petitioner, the Committee again directed the Vigilance Cell to submit second report; and (iii) The order impugned is passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to meet the findings in the second report of the Vigilance Cell in as much as the copy thereof has not been supplied to the petitioner. 5. The petitioner further submits that as back as in 1356 Fasli, in a judicial proceeding, the petitioner's grandfather's caste is shown as `Beda- jangam'. It is, however, submitted that since the said document is received recently, the same could (3) wp2865-11 not be produced before the Committee. 6. We find that the grievance of the petitioner is justified. 7. In the event the Committee considers the second report of the Vigilance Cell, it was incumbent on the part of the Committee to give a copy of that report of the Vigilance Cell to the petitioner and also an opportunity to meet any findings therein which were adverse to the petitioner. The same would be violative of natural justice. In that view of the matter, the petition deserves to be allowed. 8. In the result, the impugned order dated 9th March, 2011, passed by the Respondent No. 2 Committee is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Respondent No. 2 Committee for considering it afresh. The Respondent No. 2 Committee shall furnish a copy of the second report of the Vigilance Cell to the petitioner and give an opportunity to the petitioner to meet the findings in that report. The petitioner would be at liberty to produce on record the certificate/document of 1356 Fasli showing the (4) wp2865-11 caste of the petitioner's grandfather as `Beda- jangam' and the Respondent No. 2 Committee would take the said document into consideration while deciding the matter. It is further directed that until the decision of the Respondent No. 2 Committee on remand, no coercive action would be taken by the respondent No. 4 against the petitioner and in the event the order that would be passed by the Respondent No. 2 Committee is adverse to the interest of the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect to for a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of communication thereof. Rule is made absolute accordingly. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] npj/wp2865-11